F*W W W W World Wide Web Witness Inc. Home Page Volume What is New
BULLETIN ONE HUNDRED AND FIVE
IN UNDERLYING METHOD
with brief reference in this updated
summary, to details
A FIT OF THE NOTHING BLUES,
COMPLETE WITH TRUMPETS
NEEDS AN ANSWER
See for systematic study of Creation:
That Magnificent Rock, Lectures on Creation with
Bulletins 1, 2, 13, 15, 27, 34, 53, 57, 59, 64, 66, 71, 82, 83, 84.
Re this topic very broadly, see The gods of naturalism have no go!
See also 1504 and
pp. 88 and 92 of The Shadow of a Mighty
margin 'trilogy' Home Page.
Again for our method in Biblical Christian Apologetics (outlined in some detail in Secession from Secession from Supposition Ch. 9), remember that for simplicity's sake and to avoid anything artificial, There is an initial emphasis. It is that we start without presupposition, which many fail to escape, find the outcome and then test the result found, with reality investigated, for verification, and the method itself for validity, so that the result is indeed confirmation of the biblical faith, and nothing resembling a relative result. It is absolute.
But with this said, consider the ultimate source of what is there.
Ponder it first as a little story. Once upon a time, before the world was even there, or any part of it, says scientism's little tale, and false crusade, adopted by so many who normally specialise in the very different science and follow scientific method, there was nothing. Rags to riches is one thing, but at least then there are rags, and the riches are there!
Here it is entire. Nothing to the right, to the left, of space, of time, of matter, of logic, of anything and of space for it if it were there. Nothing.
Nothing, however, lacks any assignable feature whatsoever. When that is all there is, that is all you will ever have.
That is its definition. If the original first start of the universe, then, were really nothing, then you and I COULD not be here, far less communicating. Put differently, if it all started from nothing, then what lacks everything would have to have being (to BE there), power (to DO anything), potential (to develop itself or anything else), order (to impart it), law (to impose it, rather than let be, lacking all power and constitution to implement anything), mathematical brilliance far past that of man, in order to make man's sub-type of the same, itself not nearly of so high an order, and so on. Time and space must flow freely from nothing's fingers, which it does not have, nor can it create a flow, being nothing. Nor can it properly be referred to as an 'it' since it has no counterpart in reality. Only in imagination does it have existence, and then only to deny it anywhere else!
That is the absurdity of the position, other than just contradicting origins, and just begging the question and putting it there without explanation, source or means. Tangles of words do not alter the logical impasse.
For the Big Bang variant of this self-contradiction as one specialist once said to me, Nothing's nothing. In fact, in this ludicrous scenario, pressure must be (already) there, involving force and space, things to pressurise and potential to be decompressed (to some extent), and so too must be present the space into which the immense forces involved in this imaginative construction, will drive almost nothing (if you can drive it, it must be there to drive). They CAN drive it only in imagination since its capacity to be driven assumes it to be an extant respondent to force, and force to be there, a matter of matter or something relevant to physical force, to be forced.
How long must, on this question-begging bang model, must the (unaccounted for) forces drive the (unaccounted for) materials into (unaccounted for) space in (unaccounted for) time ? It is until it becomes filled with imagination, wit, order, law, almost inconceivable levels of miniaturisation and so on, logical DNA with a profundity of multi-tasking, in itself pure horror for creating with vast intelligence in our terms, but pure delight to see in efficient operation. Small wonder there do not cease to be continuing problems awaiting this absurd substitute for accounting thought (some outlined in Dismantling the Big Bang, by Alex Williams and Dr John Hartnett in a penetrating, critical assessment).
Assume everything, all principles like logic, and you won't have to have creation at all, or anything else, when you awake to the fact that this line of thought is just virtually re-writing the question as if this were some kind of answer.
Thus in this you BEGIN (apart from the ludicrous misuse of "nothing'') with not only vast arrays of integrated aspects in immediately available potential, like time, space, force, pressure, but with the potential in particular for logical arrangements (so able to be investigated by students now in TERMS of logic, and providing correlations of inter-relating laws, mutual intricacies and integralities). These need, for workability, to be mutually integrating and conceptually capable of co-operation as well as ordination. Mentality has conceptuality as a product; nothing else does, except the products of mentality, in program.
Upward additives, such as the overall powers of what is to be created in this uncreative and merely presumptive way, such as power both to express and to read directions which of course have to be written in the DNA along with readability by what is jointly consigned in one information system, power to analyse logically what is there on the part of mind as also to fight it on the part of will (or other courses that appeal), this too must find its basis in nothing at all. Absolute nothing is indeed the most wonderful writing material if you populate it with the products of the human mind, and forget entirely what you are talking about: nullity in every conceivable or inconceivable respect.
Actually, the power to be logical involves (as now) the power to analyse and understand it, and to choose not to be rational at all; as likewise the power to will and enterprise, all of which has different actual causative requirements: even though in some things, power to use may be waived away in tempestuous tantrums or unrealistic dreams*DNA. The 'nothing' or else some begging the question strategy of propaganda deviousness, some circumlocution, is a staggeringly simplistic way of ignoring the actual needs for origin of the universe, just ushering them in like some well-known client with a large cheque-book, who does not need to pay.
But in that case, he is able to pay; 'nothing' and populate the real estate that is not there; and its various latter-day additives, are not.
This is not only multiple and continual self-contradiction, since to account for things you have to account for all of them, and not beg the question with the most thorough-going, continual self-contradiction ever conceived, though it is possible worse is to come in the dissident and degenerative future, amid such wild confusion of terms.
Often one has to point
out this simple fact: If you contradict yourself, it is not essential
for anyone else to do so, since you have refuted yourself. If you use co-ordinates of
contradictory, but mutually affirmed vocabulary, then you qualify for
IN UNDERLYING METHOD,
MYTHS AND BIOLOGICAL FAIRY STORIES
CAN ONLY COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER
But fairy stories have their own little ways.
The SECOND PART of this myth (correct usage of the term, that is, what indicates with inane confidence without any ground, what logically requires ground), is the absence of creative componentry, of fashioners of ingenuity and of harmonious interaction of new and old systems, along the way from nothing to thought.
If you have a class of 30 varied students and remove the lowest performing 20%, it is clear, assuming the situation in essence constant, that you will gain a higher average performance. What you will not gain, is matchless students above the norm in capacity and potential. THEIR talents, at the top of the class, remain the same. Removal of the worst does not create the best, far less enhance it, but leaves that as it was.
To expect masterpieces of law, mathematics, order, contrivance, intimate rearrangement of new features in complexly multiple relationships with the old, to come from the removal of some of the worst (and even that has strong barriers as former Cornell Professor J.C. Sanders points out in his Genetic Entropy), is like expecting the bombing of part of London to increase the wonder of its palaces in other parts. That is surreal nonsense.
Yet that production-less evolutionism, is simply lacking progressively, just as initially, what is the point: the power to create what is from an adequate source. Never is DNA found writing itself as one of the interesting features of matter, without intelligence. Matter is FOUND to be available for constructions with it as instrumental, by man; not one of these features is the power to make itself, without the meaningful monitoring of intelligence, initiation of linguistic system, far less for such exploits to come from nothing, when whatever you have in mind is not and cannot be there! (On these and allied features, since this is broad coverage, see 1504, Bulletin One Hundred, Bulletin Thirty Nine, World Amiss, Heaven Aboard, Ch. 15, Divine Sublimity Ch. 2, History, Review and Overview, Ch. 5.)
The all but incredible confusion and irrationalism is as always in these fields, whether they point of application be politics, or science, or history, just as the Bible has been saying for thousands of years, while predicting the case would become worse: a case of spiritual blindness mixed with myth (II Timothy 4:1-4, Romans 1:17ff., II Peter 2, Matthew 24). As noted, the spirit of man may obstruct the results of his thoughts for a variety of reasons; and when it comes to the authorship and ownership of such a marvel as the universe, looting it is consciously or unconsciously, partly or wholly, appealing to many, who in some cases, go further than dictators who are satisfied with a bit more of this world. Many however are the strange motivations, pre-occupations or fixations on 'owning' a universe which scientism cannot even understand in its very essence.
To this error, natural intelligence is constantly shown to be irrelevant ( Ephesians 2, 4, Romans 1:17ff.), for from earlier sophists, a branch in Greek life, to the present, the case does not in essence alter. The state of the mind merely points towards the sub-type of the confusion. In a way, it is like a flame of love (and hatred). It can disorder perception to a degree almost inconceivable at first.
In the case in hand, what is obvious is neglected, and what is not available is inserted in wild theories none of which even deigns to touch the brim of reality, or fails to wail when it is exposed. That is why philosophy, as one repository of this rebellion, may appear so incredibly inchoate, incoherent and undisciplined.
Parallel with this, on all sides, nothing but eviction of evolutionism for its continual failure to meet and match rational expectations on unending points, accords with scientific method. It is an arrant philosophy. Consider the excerpt below from History, Review and Overview, Ch.5, for just a glimpse of the complete failure of fulfilment of theoretical expectations, and that at a vast level.
Just as every avenue is closed,
and that emphatically, as endeavour is made to force matter to declare its mentality and its ingenuity in origination,
and just as logic denies not only success to what lacks the means, and access to myth or magic as a sustainable ground;
and just as in the functionality, the equipment and the record, in terms of the grosser kind, a pall of smoke attests the devastation of mere imagining, that lazy option, masses of miserable mess-ups in futile failures on the way 'up' lacking in the record like pulse in a corpse, since unintelligence is not very good at things and its operations would leave more than a trace:
so in microbiology it is no different.
As Denton remarked (see Ch. 4 above):
"molecules, like fossils have failed to provide the elusive intermediates so long sought by evolutionary biology.”
Moreover of the molecular level, one recalls, he declared this,
"their arrangements and character show mathematical precision, definitive design unlike gradational concepts".
Would you expect a Swiss watch to be an affair of plasticity ? It is child's play compared with this. Plasticity is not in the stars, but in the framework invented and deposited, each area and avenue, each arena indeed exposing what is its own intrinsic capability, as when many modifications of ride and tempo can be achieved in a car, but not the exposition of the vehicle into verse.
There are things rational, and things irrational. The diversification procedures are many, varied, and continually being better realised; but they are just that, not creation! The DNA masses for that ceased long ago; it is not a method for the impossible, but an option for the capable, the Creator of what is not there until this ABSOLUTE SUFFICIENCY chooses to act. It stops, as with our own small creations, when that too is decided.
That coming and going then also needs ground, and it is part of the nature of intelligence and will in tandem. It is also part of the verification which our universe provided, being as normal to us, as a trilogy of matter, mind and spirit, as to the process of creation itself ().
In the coded, programmatic, constructive, creative language we have written so much in our bodies, there is required the expressible understanding and the facility of symbolic, sustained, preserved, coherent, practical, energised executive and coded constructions beyond the best human minds. It also involves decoding for action, so that plans can be carried out; and this in an overall system of symbolism, one thing being designated as meaning another. But matter does not designate, rather conforming to designations in natural laws without the facility, ability of exercising discretion.
The barriers to a self-making universe are immense, intense and conclusive, whether from the phase of nothing or that of unorganised, pre-manufactured bits to fit, to enable other bits to work. Enablement of operations to proceed at all, often requires having products as initial input or co-ordinates for them also, which do not exist, or have to be made by something 'to come', in a doomed misapplication of method. In that case, the result has to precede the cause, an instrumentality to come before what produces WITH it. It is as in manufacture: you have to have everything ready for immediate co-operation, with harmonious mutuality.
To bypass this, is merely cheating on creation, which power plans it that way, and proceeds with relevant timing. In much you have to have not only what is intensive but comprehensive in complexity and in structure.
Failure is continual as found
not only in the vast concourse of top biological pronouncement
about the empirical lack of any evidence at the grosser level
of gradualistic, categorical advance,
not merely in the information theory denial of the very concept
(cf. Dr Werner Gitt, Without Excuse), as if rationality could be imparted by
not alone in the logical exclusion of effects dwarfing
the pretended causes categorically,
not singly in the molecular divisions in their acuteness and precision,
and non-alignment with gradational theory,
not just in the exquisite and all but unending mathematical, structural,
ingenious and compressed data storage, selective, well-timed application
and movement through stored command to multiple and commanded
elements of the whole, varied by subtly of arrangement to give contained but
No, it is found also in this, that the very endeavour to make life, not merely as it were, to pare its finger nails, or move about its organs, inserting genes or removing, as man contrives, but creating it requires a synthesising intelligence of a rarefied kind. It involves articulation of symbols with given meaning, and by its nature is required to meet receptors interpreting meaning, and their chronological matching to achieve results. This is an intellectual exercise in information storage and application. It involves not only organisation but orders in a context of meanings, of assignment, consignment, and collusion, hence mentality, hence will.
But passion as often, rules. Rationality flies away, like the coast for those lost in a raging sea. Alas, many seem lured to paddle out to it, despite the lashings of the waves.
This empowered pursuit, therefore, despite persistence in seeking confirmatory testimony, that spans the scores of years futilely passing, with the desire that naturalism naturally inculcates into the hearts of its devotees: this is an utter failure. Inherent principles do not "arise" to govern the concepts and the creative correlations of pre-made mini-machines which have to do the work, so many dismiss as 'happening somehow' are never found casually making themselves. Matter does not SHOW the power or the examples.
Life works it so, by meaningful symbols, commands and equipment passed on as in any invention. Life is definably invention, for self-contradictory and question-begging, non-empirical assumptions are not only unworkable, but overworked pretensions, as calamitous in theory, like bombed factories, or imagined ones, as in practice.
What is required is met
in the actualities which make up life, under explicit coded direction.
Talk about principles does not make them; surmise about the natural field does not constitute evidence; principles are not wafted into the situation without their first being exhibited to be operative as a datum, unless with question begging scientistic fantasy. ()
A good aspect is shown in Dr Jonathan Sarfati's work, By Design for example. The DNA has to have in its available store what it is to produce, so that it has to wait for what it needs to act, for the results of its action first to occur. It would wait long! What frustration that would be if it were human: you have to wait for what you need to produce something, until that something comes anyway, without you.
What is specific to providing for something not yet operational, to come anyway is turning the mythical into mere disorganisation. It is describing the wrong sort of system: this is a created one, not something plausible outside both magic and logical basis!
Scientifically speaking, you cannot just imagine what would be nice to have for some theory, keep repeating that it is there, never find its relevant evidential testimony, decide what can and cannot be according to taste: this is waste, cut and paste, a woeful and reckless abuse of the method which gave science some of its dignity, when followed. Consider from Ch. 5 of Dancers ... and Answers this testimony citing Denton in his Evolution: A Theory in Crisis.
Indeed, the "antagonism" between evolutionary biology and cladistics is "only the latest manifestation of the inherent contradiction between taxonomy with its distinct divisions and ordered hierarchy" and what evolutionary biology requires, "the demonstration of sequence in nature" (op.cit. pp. 139-140). At the micro-biological level, the molecular, similarly (op. cit. p. 294), there is an "incredibly orderliness", with variety inside a group, but distinctive categories from group to group. In gross structure, order and hierarchy, in minute structure, order and distinctive divisions. Further (p. 290), "At a molecular level, no organism is "ancestral" or "primitive" or "advanced" compared with its relatives. It is to the non-evolutionary pattern that nature conforms," Denton observes.
What is never found is a new design, a genuine novelty, a new architectural facility. That is why Goldschmidt remonstrates: "The facts of great general importance are these: - When a new phylum, class or order appears, there follows a quick, explosive... diversification so that practically all orders of families known appear suddenly and without any apparent transitions" - SMR p. 252B.
Stephen Jay Gould in his writing is scarcely less literate on the topic of fact in this regard: "How could such a view of life as a single progressive chain, based on replacement by conquest and extending smoothly from the succession of organic designs through the sequence of human technologies, possibly accommodate anything like our modern interpretations of the Burgess fauna ? ... The modern themes of maximal disparity and decimation by lottery are more than just unacceptable under such a view of life: they are literally incomprehensible. They could never even arise for consideration..." (Wonderful Life, p. 260).
This is literally true. It could not arise for consideration, except for a pseudo-papal decree, or decretal, or pronunciamento, this time from biological 'believers' that so it MUST BE. It uses its own (often professional and pseudo-academic) constraints to enforce 'belief', this being just one variant of human nature subject to force, found often in armed struggles or academic purlieus of pretension. It is either as such a misalignment for man's operation, as to denote mental paralysis, or moral pretence, an inward prescription for survival, or other atrocities of such tragic enforcement, on man.
"Does not arise for consideration"! Gradual evolutionism from nothing nowhere in no time, to everything somewhere, some time (time itself included in the present, with space), this fiasco is frequently even enforced with withering rigour by the anti-cognoscenti, whose predicted belief in a lie (II Thessalonians 2:10-11, II Peter 3). It is equal to the defrauding of scientific method occasioned in their arrant dogmatism. It is precisely parallel to the papacy of old telling Galileo that the earth does not rotate around the sun: for SO the case MUST be, says their heretical authority. Here the shibboleth is this: there MUST be no eternal Creator, adequate for all.
And yet that is not so, nor can it be ..., for otherwise nothing is equal to everything, muse many a modern, stricken Galileo here in parallel, silenced but not really convinced! Some indeed escape from this pitiable pliability, with both courage and enterprise, because of the remorseless provision of facts, not mangled by false churches (SMR pp. ff.), by misguided scientism or an appalling mixture of both. Many, braced by the total coverage available in Christ and the Bible, as found constantly in these 242 volumes, would rather die than leave the truth as a stricken divorcee (cf. Isaiah 50:1), and accept the penalties dealt out to so many for non-conformity.
Some do indeed leave the reeking irrationalities of cultural conformity to organic evolutionism and any other form of self-creation from what is not there, at vast professional cost. Truth counts and its score a nd testimony is innumerable, inveterate and comprehensive, as well as unique, and with only one possible source in knowledge and emplacement in sustained testimony, to deny it is the same old idolatry in modern dress.
So here: "the life does NOT come by the superabundant power of creative enactment without evidence of 'trying'. Life MOVES." This is what the 'church' of Philosophical Biology decrees. You MUST affirm that it does not. Superabundant trying ? Why where is the paleontological evidence of crowded billions far outstripping the well-primed cases with efficient DNA with their inept futility and failure! where the exhibits of myriads of confused symbols, trashed DNA, self-manufacturing messes, incredible conglomerates of random oddments of code, with random features, dying out on the way to the imagined end rather than what is found to be observed.
And what is that ?
It is the fashionings in integrality*INT, in cohesion, in incredible seeming efficiency and sufficiency: where then are the ludicrously misplaced systematics such as befit mindlessness in myriads, where are they in the natural system on paleontological display ? where are these in the evidences of time in the laboratory of history ? Where is the testimony of the impossible occurring in the presence of unquivering, unquavering empirical facts! This null result is there, as a reinforcement of the protestations of logic, the protesting roar of reason.
Mindless evolutionism lacks the initial and the consequential at every level, by assuming first and last, what is not found, and using hope as a basis for what does not come. ONE failure in verification of a specific forecast is enough to sink a theoretical ship; but this, it is continual, and could not well be otherwise. It is like trying to make a car go systematically in a given journey on its own without direction or a power source.
How did the disorganised morass (coming from nowhere for no reason in this unbewitching 'model' of naturalism) come, and how did it produce, after its magical arrival, the comprehensive, coded, specifying and responding sovereignty of system as a means of protracted advance, one found from an allegedly direction-free oblivion ? Into this pool, miraculously there are to be given cognisable words, arriving without referents, which also need to be supplied in a stateable (and stated) system, as if the case were otherwise, as if God were not at work in the conceptualisation, verbalisation, codification, assignment of meaning for referents by adding this work of mentality, by means of mind. Organic evolutionism, in its gullible vainglory, is making electrical wiring in a space vessel or aircraft in its miles, child's play by comparison! How in unsophistication to produce such sophistication, except by sophistry!
We do not catch sight of any large-scale parodying through incompetence of the cleverly operative unit, achieving through defined absence, wonders comprehensible when seen in action, and this because of the burden of endless crashes and clashes! What arrant activation of non-equipment is this embrace of error. We do not find as constantly the case, the empirical facts that fit the quasi-religious evolutionism which rains like acid rain, on a deluged world, caught in philosophical effrontery to fact, enforced fantasy and anti-empirical obstruction. Not for nothing did Professor Lewontin frankly declare materialism to be the goal and constraint, whatever just-so stories were being used to support such ideas by evolutionary practitioners!
Indeed creation of anything, into something, into a logically organised array inspectable by logic, not merely a shaved down part of it,
misted by rejectionism
waved off by
airy obstructionism as now so common, or
downgraded by reductionism,
requires precisely the power appropriate, the skill apt and the creativity which has such fruits attached its style.
Time makes havoc of what has no adequate support and does not erect citadels without matter, or with matter, without architectural flair (it does not invent itself having nothing to do it with); but needs as is daily demonstrated input at every and any level of what it takes for what is to come. It could all be systematised and programmed into existence, and this could be found in a mass of blueprints stored from the first, of course. It is just that this is not found and we are dealing with this world, not any number of ones which could be imagined.
To bring into what is a law-girt existence in co-ordinated framework, and ancillary mini-motors, every one of the multiplied, inter-operative levels, conceptually integrated, programmatically perpetuated is neither a dime at a time or a letter thrown in or out at a time, to be accorded the creative facilities which are the basis of such results. It is a matter of pervasive system, coherent inter-connected connotations for symbols with denotations standardised, and the practical provisions for the finesse of the former and the function of the latter.
Amid the facile assumptions of neo-Darwinism, there was grave discontent and at one point it emerged categorically in a conference of experts, named, Mathematical Challenges to the New-Dearwinian Theory of Evolution. The work of those such as Dr Murray Eden and in particular Professor Schűtzenberger, Professor of Mathematics in the University of Paris at the time (1966) at the Wistar Institute Symposium, were trenchant and unyielding, for the non-feasibility of the neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory. Eden asserted that no concepts and knowledge were available in terms of which rationally to present organic evolution. Schűtzenberger, also an evolutionist, reported wholly negatively on the topic at the technical level of his expertise. He declared himself totally unable to construct any theory or view (with special reference to experimentation in artificial intelligence) which would tolerate organic evolution. How could he, how soon can mathematical theories and quantitative 'arisings' come from nowhere to do it all! (See SMR pp. 140- 159).
But let us return directly to our current aspect. If it were otherwise, we would like to see it. If logic texts kept on writing themselves, or if multi-partite results could be found through DNA written support bringing itself into being for entirely new created biotic designs (rather than the opposite as Princeton's Stephen Jay Gould pointed out), and whole new arenas of ever-ascending life could be seen sent from nowhere, arriving as an enduring universe function, in working order (if they do don't work they are not there to be selected), acquiring biotic funds from somewhere for their development (not mere downgrade by much copying of the original, or variabilities within specified borders, dependent on apt stimuli), we could start with empirical data, and end in explanatory hypotheses.
Omit the data, however, and there is no call for hypotheses. This is reverse cycle scientific method: start with theory and persecute what won't fit, like any other political drive that may not even make claims to science for its genesis! Face it or not, it is time to stop. Scientism is merely one more meretricious assault on rationality, in an inept thrust to take over the universe that man did not create, nor it preludes, not its powers, nor its principles, nor its potential.
For this world, organic evolutionism is not the theory for the experimental result any more than there is theoretical background for it. You don't get it, and it does not get you. It is harassment by irrelevant hypothesis, nothing more.
Since this empirical parade is not so, we do not have this scientific luxury of normal scientific method, but are presented with the commonplace fiasco instead, to start with unattested theories, pining for facts, and constantly talking of HOPE that one day something may be found to support it. This is a distinctive of religion, not of scientific method, and only of bad religion. Man in large measure has now spent, even in the recent field, over one hundred and fifty years, in this field trying to merge science into bad religion, without even in general, trying to find out why! If man were to ruin his environment in this impassioned and wilful ignorance, or by many violations remove himself from the planet, is this wise ? Have supermen arrived, or new variations of pride, confusion and ethical ruin! Rockets may have gone up, but man as a personal being in dead, wounded and striving millions has largely gone down. He mocks his Maker, and in so doing, destroys himself.
You can by this futile lampooning of reality, try to get rid of God from your life and world, but is the latter better for it, as ever new, but in principle always old, dictators imagine that by their calamitous and cruel glory seeking, they are leading the way for mankind (etc.)! Some roar to steal the world, all that work, not to acknowledge it or the worker, the Creator, but to grab it and become rich in potential. Evolution says: do this, do that! and the desired end does not happen. They do not have what it takes to handle the work of God in their confusion and grabbing. The seething philosophy of organic evolution, seeks ever new political dunces to lead on from Hitler, Stalin and others, fascinated by raw power and ruinous ideas, hopes always shattered.
But God has what it takes to handle the work of God, and through the word of God to provide an option in the midst of vainglorious horror mixing with man like a poisonous mist. He does not allow His absolute confrontation of principles, power and purity from His human creation, continually violating, vitiating and vilely demeaning and seeking to obliterate His own. He does not sit back and ponder the lack of pleasure He has in His magnificently endowed creation, in His image, with multiple access to life, liberty and love; but from the first as needed (and as in Genesis 1-3 provided) spoke of the conditions for man, and of the remedy to be provided when man fell. It had to be; but where was it to be found ? That is a major turning point in the method of biblical Christian apologetics.
What testimony requires, is what research finds. If there had been no Bible, all would have been uninterpretable, fading into failure; but since there is, then that necessity as seen and presented, EMPIRICALLY IS MET, in validation (cf. SMR pp. 43-47, with pp 88-96 with *22 and *27). What logic declared MUST be, IS! The action of God in fabricating in billions of cells His linguistical modes of command for the making each generation of our bodies is matched by His own directly specific account of the entire operation, complete with remedy and so ground for continuation of our race, till the time is past for remedy and present for judgment.
So God has been consistent, insistent, a vast provider, has disciplined man in what man derides, like a canny student laughing at the Headmaster as he destroys his life with endless travesties of true living and triumphs of disorder. There has been a certainty that He would deal with sin, just as there has been a provision of that in the Gospel, as foretold and enacted and applied in preaching and teaching from the Bible, uniquely provided without logical alternative, meeting the case as no competition does or God.
There is always a difficulty in impersonating God. Unless you have His power and wisdom, efforts to do this are volcanoes of soot, tawdry splendour sickeningly spilt on the vast lawns of His creation, many of whom take increasingly to drugs, psychological and physiological, to hasten the destructive process.
No religion of truth fears anything, or is vulnerable to anything but distortion and hatred. Such is the position on biblical creationism, which covers cause and consequence in a vast compilation of assertions of utter harmony both with themselves and the world opened for inspection. There has to be an acquiring from somewhere, and this independently investigable area is its testimony. God is never out of fashion for sober thought, since He has fashioned both it, throwing in brilliant languages for automatic functioning and control by command over the generations, and giving man the power to be confused if he wants to, rather than face the basis required for his life.
The vast mutually dependent, multiply machined, linguistically ordered life given to man can start only by machinations to produce machines to induce occurrences meaningless singly, and ineffectually. Machines do not make machinations; they exhibit them. we are far more than machines, but our equipment is not fashioned with less. Conceptually expressible, it has no other type of basis than this, which both breeds it and shows it: this is the domain; this is what is not found misaligned in confusion (except for the many copying errors over many generations which are assured in a world of this kind). These are multiply alignable when fantasy flees. The conception with the creation meets what is needed by having what it takes.
When it does, and the specialised creative totality is in operation, relevant to such an item as man, you remain with mutually aligned and constrained co-functional features in analytically separable orders of being: mind, matter and spirit, integrally encoded, reposed, given relationship and mutual meaning, leading to integrality of being, with free analytical provision for thought and (if desired) wilfully contradictory opportunities for spirit.
You have then the power to proclaim truth (or give transit to lies), with God the external inspector, for otherwise, there is on the organic evolutionary model, and any like it, no truth, and proclamation is another gaffe, or self-contradictory foozle. Fancy promulgating what your model indicates does not exist! You have also the demonstrated ability to proclaim what is to be (or assess any such testimony from any source), and enquire why and in what terms it is to be understood. It is all empirically verifiable, the Speaker, Cogitator, Writer, Creator, as a basis adequate for its exploits, including intellectual systems implicit in the constructions we investigate, and explicit in our given investigatory tools, logic and imagination and trial.
Meanwhile, on the defective and intellectually lethargic model of organic evolutionism, the way from nothing to exquisite wonders of rationality is to be found in mind only, because it lacks everything needed for these processes to move outside it and live. It is the 'because' inherent in such evolutionary thought, that is to be given first class honours for fantasy. Because we had no water, we drank that fluid abundantly! Because no initiatory Spirit is allowed to be there, therefore a singularity arrived, reinforced itself, had itself surrounded with most of the major constituents of the universe, and exploded out the wonders of the nothingness from which it came. It has the same preposterous almost deluded ring!
This happens in combination with empirical conformity on every side ? The worse than bovine, moronic displays of a 'nature' without mind at all on the way to making one, these do not occur. People may not like the wonder and the woes that appear, but how effective they both are! It is like a world of guns or grace: the guns and grace both appear well done, even if the curse on the earth which appears in so much, both in cause and effect, is most intelligently made, so very effective in rebuke, reminder, warning, meeting casual effrontery with a 'nature' that can exhibit both astute wisdom and fearful rebukes. It reeks with competency, and as in bio-mimetics, astonishes in brilliance of astute and deeply conversant wisdom that challenges man to imitate the triumphs in view.
These myriad failures in code, then, littering the littoral of time, they are not there, they are not found, one more evidence of the folly of taking your own imagination as your only evidence and most prized attestation!
Yet the case continues in multiplicity and tragedy for many. Yes, it does really does come that way, say or mutter many defeated Galileos of this century, in feigned acquiescence in the face of money and power and prestige, ranting at them; and so may mumble under their breaths, following their evidences of activated arrivals: and yet it does not. In fact, there is precisely this creativity that is the constantly decisive entry. Its definable conditions are constantly met and the realities continually contradict the imaginations of what might have been. You can jumble cards all day, but unless what they represent is there, there is no point.
It is professionally required to disbelieve it, shun creation, in circumstances all but innumerable as often documented in this site, or else to act as if one did. When this author refused to co-operate with a degraded and degrading exclusion of whole dimensions of demonstrable fact, he could lecture no longer! Was any error found or cited ? Not at all. Under challenge, no fault could be found, but unless silence replaced reality, there was no way to continue lecturing. Who would lecture on a selection of the empirical and a constraint of the imaginary in a totality of imbalance and ignorance!
Why do this ? one asks. It is convenient said the authority in charge. It was convenient, we learn in John 11, to kill Christ since that would enable the continuance of the temple personnel and their housing. Therefore one chose discontinuance in this modern parallel ("the servant is not greater than his master. If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you," (John 15:20)! It was standard persecutory procedure, and the worst of it ? it was the truth that was being persecuted, the infinitely precious truth (John 14:6).
It is not a game that we are playing. If you yield truth, what are you becoming ? a power pawn!
Gould as we see above, despite being better in acknowledging facts than many, does just the same. His credo leaps from the mind, but finds no place in the book of life, for reference. It is just a dichotomy, with emphasis on the "die", as far as correct procedure in thought is concerned (cf. extensive analysis of Gould's viewpoints, Wake Up World ... Ch. 6).
Again, we read from him in his candour,
"Instead of a narrow beginning and a constantly expanding upward range, multi-cellular life reaches its maximal scope at the start, while later decimation leaves only a few surviving designs" - p. 233 op.cit...
Indeed, we find this: "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediate stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution" - S. J., Gould in his work, "Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?" Paleobiology, vol 6(1), p. 119-130 (1980), cf. SMR p. , 315Aff..
What is the reply to that ? "Arise for consideration ..."! They do not even do this, these gradualistic fantasies concerning the arrival of life and its spectacular deposits. So said Gould who preferred virtual sub-units of creation to arrive unsolicited, in at least a beginning of understanding of the realities of cohesion, creativity, simultaneity.
Incomprehensible says Gould! The opposite
however is irrationally affirmed, without ground, and in the end, literally
grounded in nothing. It is obsessively
insisted on. It
is even enforced with withering rigour by the
anti-cognoscenti, whose predicted belief in a lie (II Thess. 2:10-11, II Peter 3) is equal to the defrauding of
scientific method occasioned in their erratic dogmatism. It is precisely like
the papacy of old telling Galileo that the earth does not rotate around the
sun: for SO it MUST be, says their heretical authority.
THE DATING SEQUENCE
Miracles without God is like a whale without water: they do not work. So if you want it, and the thing is to live, you would need to provide the water - hard if you are not good at creating oceans sufficient.
The begging of the question in the Big Bang myth, as shown, does not alter the need for some feeling of plausibility somewhere in it, so long ages are invented to allow a few coppers to be thrown to the begging. Perhaps the most succinct cover of this matter comes from the Christian astrophysicist, Dr Jason Lisle. Naturalism (the doctrine that you need nothing to get everything, even though the world in its currency is declining and this breaches logic by ignoring causality) frequently (in its own off-hand way) makes assumptions. One of these, or rather a bevy, is this:
"that light got here entirely by natural means, and traveled at a constant rate, over a constant distance, with time also being constant", (Taking Back Astronomy p. 47).
He points out that
"it is ridiculous to argue that a supernatural explanation is wrong because it cannot be explained by natural causes. This would be circular reasoning."
Obviously, there is no problem for an author to write, scrap, scratch out, cover with liquid paper, stroke through words and so forth IN WRITING a book. To attempt to make the complete edition of the work the condition for writing it would be more than absurd: blind and woefully confused. So here, if God wanted to bring light to any point at any time during creation of space, at any rate, anywhere, that is His business. Laws of continuance, as so often pointed out here, are not modes of creation.
Maintenance is not creation. Housekeeping is not construction.
Take the institution of light from the energy source, mathematical contriver and format provider, its architectural genesis. The content of nascent light could be synchronised with reality in any way seen to be fitting. In parallel, an air-conditioning unit does not have to blow its way into existence and then into the right place on the wall. It is put there after being available for the appropriate co-ordination of parts and function for the cooling event. So is light in a house, from its source. So is light in a universe, a part of the available energy source which declines.
Now that time, gravity, space, apportionment of time in various circumstances with Einstein provide increasingly for startling laws of relationship, the arena is open. Naturally in such circumstances no one is likely to have the astronomical variables in hand, so that the Big Bang theory, as Lisle points out, has itself a problem in finding the time for its assumptions.
Its own time - for light to arrive to match the empirically found temperature closeness even at great distances - is far too little (Dr Jason Lisle, Taking Back Astronomy, p. 48), and the naturalistic model, for its part, has no option from the nature-creating Being, to prevent His putting it how and when and in what format and by what means He chooses, as a rational account of creation does. That is only one of its fatal weaknesses (cf. Dr Don Batten of CMI, in his extensive
101 Evidences for a Young Age, at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/101_evidences_
If you want to make Nature make itself before it is there to do it, limited by impossibility at the outset, it would be strange if it did conform to reason later! Facts are one of the most stubborn things and keeping models to them is another. You need to start with facts, not waive futile hands at them and say there is sure to be an answer, when your very model not only starts contrary to them, but to logic also. Antilogy and antinomy (q.v.) join hands against facile theories.
Apart from the near to endless evidences against the long-age ideas, there is the fundamental error. If you want to found yourself on 'nothing' or some circumlocution for it, nothing CAN come of it, since of potential it has nothing; and it is assuredly false. After that, if you want nothing to have more time (there is no time when there is nothing at all), you run into a host of contrary evidence, and assumptions (such as the nature of time, space, gravity, rates of happening over time, absence of anti-matter and so forth - see Batten above).
'Nothing' has to continue to be enormously productive or you simply have to imagine things like time and space and laws and rates, such as govern astronomy in its various dimensions, and matter, and life through its DNA aspect. Begging the question is the other option, just using code words to give meaning to the compression and expression of a law, mathematics, logic source, as if pressure (begging the question) were some answer to not having anything (like pressuring your local Bank Manager to have something in your name, when in fact there is ... nothing).
As to these rates of occurrence, and modes, and actions in the finished product, the prepared setting, for this universe, they cannot determine HOW they were invented, put in place and initially constructed, in rate or place or time or with time. This includes the invention and placement of light with its rules, laws and structure, into the developing universe when under construction: formation, rate of movement and the dynamics of its installation are results, not causes.
For formation, you need information; just as you do not judge a book by its cover, so you do not produce one by a sprinkling of its words. These are results, and the way they continue is by no means the way they came. In fact, such styles of thinking are the height of absurdity. Results demand causes and the results do not retrospectively control the causes, but prospectively the cause conditions the result. It is like imagining the working of a car is a species of the type of thing found in its being constructed. It is a mental facile misconstruction.
In fact, in assessment of the biblical model or perspective, using already created modes, such as we now have, to determine creative means to put them there, is not just gauche: it is a contradiction. Institution and the resulting constitution are not comparable features, any more than are making a runway for aircraft, on the one hand, and keeping it intact, on the other! or trying to deduce how planks set firmly in the wall of a house, had to keep to the style of things which they now do, when under construction or emplacement.
They not now do what controls or limits what was done when they were being cut and installed. Such is alas to use a phrase from Cambridge Professor Hoyle about naturalism, 'nonsense of a high order.' Manufacture and maintenance are entirely different things.
Meanwhile, lacking little in thoroughness, fascinating experiments and analysis are being carried out and documented in the RATE group of Ph.D. scientists, one of this research group's works being the notable Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, edited by Vardiman, Snelling and Chaffin, while Thousands not Billions, from Dr Don DeYoung, gives on overview in 2005 and intensive coverage is found at sites such as Creation magazine, from Dr Humphreys for example and Dr Wieland, the latter in March 2004.
Accounts of enormous, patient research on radioactive remains, rocks, crystals and compelling, cohesive results are found not only in DeYoung's work, but in that of. Dr Andrew Snelling (2012, 2014), a research leader in Answers in Genesis, at the site
This scientist has written clearly on the precise reasons from the work in the RATE group requiring one to realise that there has been a vast change in the rate of radioactive decay attested in a multitude of concentric circular radiohalos, (at times oval), decay products inside rock of intrusive radioactive materials. In his review, he details the case of biotite, where polonium radiohalos are produced, and this in a situation which fits ideally with a flood scenario, and explanation is given of a staggering system involving hot water and washing, a continuing supply of exceedingly short term components of radioactive decay, of passing elements so aligned as to be able to produce the result recorded. What fits the heads of many evidences and kinds of evidence is a very notable resolution, when things come to a head.
For the halo to form, Dr Snelling indicates, uranium must "eject at least 500 million alpha particles to form a single dark radiohalo," this from parent uranium 238 atoms needing at present rate some 100 million years to form. In fact, this would have had to happen "all over the globe."
In view of the detailed survey of the area in rock attestation and radioactive products and by-products, he declares this of the solution:
"The only reasonable explanation for their origin is a recent, worldwide Flood. Indeed, the unique conditions required to form such spheres show us that radioactive decay - and granite formation - was extremely rapid in the past."
This is part II in a series of three articles, articulating the very extensive data found for the testing, analysis and conclusion, and showing the constraining conditions in the cases in view, for the increase of rate of decay required to be of the order of up to one billion times to meet the constraining data. This rate has always been one of the necessary elements for determining dates by means of radioactive data, and the assumptions concerning it have been one essential part of the basis of the natuaralistic dating assumptions commonly used. Change in this, like change in the size of a hole for sand to be used in an hour glass, controls the result.
Assuming the rate is assuming the date. The rate may of course be supernaturally changed as adapted for some purpose, or to meet some purpose, as in the perhaps parallel case of the long day of Joshua, altering the norm of a given quantity, action or work, just as we may change our house or add to it, or alter it here or there, or for a season; and failure to realise this, or some of the variables built in and activatable by the Lord at will, is merely an abuse of the theocratic approach, belief in God.
Using someone else's method, perspective, model to interpret yours is a form of cheating, intended or not. It puts their defects or weaknesses into your system, and then criticises them! It removes elements of your system, replacing them with its own, wile continuing to refer to yours. Compliment ? perhaps, but deadly displacement, a confusion even of methods! .
The shortening of the age allotted to the span of man's life is a judgmental example of a divine action within His own creation, whether to rebuke or to discipline. The flood was assuredly to discipline, an alternative to destruction of the human race entirely.
The age change for mankind was a specialised divine action, not destroying order, but limiting the human orderers, in their self-elevating grandeurs. The flood reminded that man though made able to accomplish much, did not accomplish his own advent, and that his end can be better than the crankiness, decrepitude of spirit and corruption even of youth, that continuation may provide.
Again, in certain unusual variants of action, whether in the household of man or of the Lord Himself, some things change, temporarily or otherwise, during changes in other things, or along with them.
To find what happened you have two sources, evidence and reason, and divine diction. My finding over a quarter of a century of intense work, is this, that they always agree, and the sheer ignorance of lordly man when he learns just a little, is as astounding as his relish for the ridiculous when on the anti-God crusade bus.
In this case, the matter of the production of the halos themselves, in their challenging environment, has a ready natural answer. Some of the components are noted below.
The case dwelt on in the articles by Dr Snelling noted above, was one where polonium halos and uranium ones, in the rock mass, required a source, since polonium has so swift a decomposition that it would normally require a vast time to produce these. How come such continuity and adequacy of supply ? These polonium 210 radiohalos being frequently found near uranium-238 sources, with their own uranium radiohalos, provided a source for the polonium variety. In this, the heated water of the flood readily supplied a continuing transport means to convey the particles emitted to the polonium halo sites near to the uranium sources. How could the fleeting polonium provisions last long enough to leave such a halo, when to start, the uranium had to enter the rock when it was not set, and the impact be made, which would then take millions of years for a radiohalo to be formed and become visible ?
First the rock would have to set quickly (far more so than for the non-flood situation) to enable ANY kind of marks to be made. Secondly the uranium would have to degrade so fast that it would produce large quantities of polonium product, enough in continuity to produce the polonium requirements for a radiohalo, estimated as requiring millions of years at our rates. To enable the amount to be sufficient to do the work of millions of years in a matter of days, the increased rate of decomposition would need to be similarly increased.
Solving the immediate problem, the normally present nearby uranium 210 is not only the indication of where the polonium could possibly have come from; it is like finding a bank book, when an apparently bankrupt person kept on spending! Its SETTING, closeness and decomposition in the sweeping water supplies continuous transport.
The solution given, then, involved the flood as the change in special conditions enabling this, water quickly sending the needed materials from the very near 238 uranium source to enable in short time, the fast forming radiohalo to appear. Fast ? a racing car compared with walking, they are both transport. One is faster. It totally alters the quantities in the outcome.
For an ant group to demolish a sand castle would indeed take time; when the tide comes in, the demolition is incomparably faster, both in scope and power. When the radioactive rate was greatly expanded, then this speed of radiohalo formation could come jointly from polonium and water transport, supplying what speedily produced a source to account for the evidence.
Indeed, the RATE group of scientists appear to be seeking with immense practical research on rock samples, to learn with heuristic emphasis, and to document findings, in areas locked up in ignorance and surmise. They have regarded it as not too much to go through exceedingly extensive research, measurements and assessment from independent bodies of the evidences found, the better to cover contingencies; and have given effort also in the theoretical considerations. Always, the data rule. Telling the data what they ought to be is never as good as finding out what they are, and then considering these realities, in order to learn.
The idea of the approach has the emphasis not of knowing all about all in advance, not prescribing by tradition and philosophy what the universe has got to show, but finding what it has to show, by sight and implication. It means using actively gained evidence initiated and persisted in, and from this seeking to find in the usual scientific way, how to explain it.
That is always the burden of science properly so-called and when worthy of the name. In this case, the evidence and naturalistic theories are so far apart in such marked ways and in many respects in multiple areas, that we even have the 101 contra evidences of Batten summarising clash of prescriptive theory and descriptive evidence in the dating area. The use of multiple technical references in his listing is much more than an adornment.
They appear in effect to be seeking to find, what actually happens or is open and closed in epochs over time, for example with light, and to it and through it, to speed and rate amid the foundations of the universe as already put in place, and not imagined as controlled by philosophy. Multiple and remarkable evidences are shown for an increased rate of radioactive decay at certain decisive fluxes in history, and that it is by no means to be assumed constant, when primary data replace surges of presumptive imaginations.
Science, even in these areas, has to get back to its basic field, and not espouse philosophies with astonishingly uncritical drowsiness; though ironically the point of the distortions of mere imagination fit the biblical definitions of man's heart, whether scientific in profession or not, when it comes to the attestations of creation, judgment and the power of God. The brouhaha of unbelief, as this writer found, brays its way to a demand for silence. Only the data crushing method may stand when it comes to God, hence origins, destiny and explanations.
Christ, says the prophet Isaiah (53) was attacked in part for NOT being guilty of violence. So now attack focusses on what is NOT suppressive at will in the vast body of relevant data. For many a career, silence on truth, data actualities, honest coverage, is indeed golden, though it is only a combination of gilt and guilt. Some prefer to keep their jobs to keeping their conscience straight, threatened and thrust out if need be.
Meanwhile, almost endless seem to be the collisions with actual data, as the myths pound on, almost as if they had forgotten how to stop. In the end of the Age, said II Timothy 4, men would be given to myths. The cultural collapse in this field, of many, is fulfilment of THIS, and just one more verification of the biblical knowledge which declares facts and future (cf. II Peter 1:19).
To revert specifically to the RATE group, they are NOT prescribing to the Founder HOW to make it (or seeking to instruct Him in 'possibilities'), but to ascertain actual variables, interactions amidst the existing data, marshalling it and seeking conceptions to cover it. How do various commonplace natural and naturalistic assumptions relate to increasingly available data ? Assumptions that dictate are not the same as results that speak. It is the latter that in this sphere, need to be heard. Such was my protest to the tertiary body in which I once lceture, but truth was not the criterion STATED, but CONVENIENCE. I had thought a tertiary site was concerned with sight, with truth; and this notion I conveyed to the cynical sounding operative in charge. Should we not cover ALL the data! I urged, but in vain. Convenience says, as in the Simon says game.
But how broad is the universe creation episode, its entry into existence, with what areas of coherent co-operation of diverse, mutually necessary functions (as often with the mini-human creations we ourselves make). Imagination conceives, thought constructs, spirit enlivens.
We are continually and intimately aware of many things needing to be made in our own human domain when we are creative, preludes, preparations, ancillary means, necessary actions to bring into joint being in order for the thing to work. Then, instructed from our own creativity just what is involved, many turn a blind eye to this, and profess what is totally unworkable, this thing waiting on that, and all without organisational and inventive profundity.
On the naturalistic theories that depend on our intellects and logic being built on a situation in which the intelligence involved is less than that of a moron, being zero, many thus seek to create from the opposites, make nothing the source, and confuse with artful words, implying all that is left out through deception. Nothing ... that is, a point, a power, a potential, a pressure, a force, a space, a time, a form, a format and so on. It is not a pity that there is such confusion, but an irrational riot, inexcusable in method, unworkable in practice, derailed by its failures as the myth goes on.
Depending on other actions which they need first in order to produce, so that each such facility has to wait for what is needed for its own creation, though that is not yet there to make it, in this naturalistic method, there is mere artifice of delusion! It cannot happen that way. It does not work. It is never found to be so, nor DNA to be writing itself from its sub-mongoloid base. To such among men, it is not their fault; here there is great fault, suppositions that do not work.
Such tantalising tasks confront you when you confront creation with airy-wish evolutionism: that is, if you try to imagine the atheistic evolutionary fiasco, creating without the Creator.
Indeed, Dr Robert W. Carter, in an article in Journal of Creation, August 2011, has this to declare:
Another issue, especially displayed among evolutionists (but creationists, including myself, are not immune), is a lack of understanding of the location of biological information. Most people tend to think DNA (the ‘genome’) is the storage place of information. While it is certainly the location of a tremendous amount of it, this gene-centered view ignores the information originally engineered into the first created organisms. The architecture of the cell, including the cell wall, nucleus, sub-cellular compartments and a myriad of molecular machines, did not originate from DNA, but was created separately and alongside DNA. Neither can exist without the other.
Alas that so much folly is taught to so many youngsters who in various ways may find their hoped for professional careers dependent on absorption of and adherence to politically correct propaganda, which in spiritual terms, is as destructive as are terrorists in physical terms, of what they did not create. In political terms, this is now being referred to more generally as FORCED SPEECH, as distinct from the rather lesser matter of LOST FREEDOM OF SPEECH. (An article by Jennifer Oriel in The Australian , January 15, on p.12, deals with the political side of developments with discernment.)
This happens because part of what creation as we empirically find it in our own productions, consists in placing together or in unison a mutual consortium of inter-operative functions. We invent, contrive, conceive, discern, imagine, stock things together in mind, assemble without roll-call and depict. This is but a small likeness to the infinitude of wisdom of the One who being divine, does not need to wait on man, or circumstance or anything else, but composes without limit, as He will. Trying to eliminate the creativity of creation is a polemic like much of some in politics, directed for power, but empty of it. The total reversal of scientific method - pushing theory in search of any fact, instead of pushing facts in search of any theory suitable and cognate, is a road to self-contradiction in affirmations which experience negates, and logic laments!
ANTILOGY AND ANTINOMY
Causality and Consequence
Self-contradiction in using one model to interpret another (leaving God out of the Biblical Model, for example, when comparing it with the model of naturalistic atheism), or advancing any proposition or idea which clashes with another, is a loose way of losing time. Logic does not contain room for both such things, and to deny logic, in any endeavour to escape this fault, is to make ANY model which does so, incapable of defence! a routine knock-out at the outset.
That is antilogy. Antinomy (nom suggests law) is worse. In this case you contradict the basic structure of law, the conditions of your own discourse. An example would be imagining a beginning of the universe, of the entire production, as a lawless extravaganza of meaningless events, and then insisting on explaining it all in logical and reasonable terms, so excluding what is an underlying and constraining condition of your model.
In fact, it is the presence of law, order and constraints which makes scientific work possible at all. It does not of course at all tell you how things got here, but it does at least signify in particular and general, crucial elements of what now exists and its routine procedures. It is open to mental understanding at its own level, and to some extent, to the application of creative will on the part of man; but this does not change the character of creation, though it may tend and often does, to ruin it, rather like a child who breaks his cot in sullen fury. It does not help him or her to grow.
Whether as with logic in code, a mental phenomenon, or in inscribed, emplaced and operative laws of matter, a physical one, postulating that they came from non-law and non-mentality, is to defy both aetiology and relevance, in a species of obstructionism. To get them from what is never found, making them without intelligence, if at all, sounds more furious than spurious, but wholly irrelevant and the exact contradiction of scientific method. That, by contrast, searches for adequate bases as far as may be found, in any direction or series of directions close or collated with what is in view: not opposites as the basis! In parallel, you would be at no little risk of being ludicrous if you insisted in financial terms that a man was rich as shown by the fact that he was poor. It is not just far-fetched, but irrelevant in a perverse sort of way.
Using antilogy as a basis for seeking scientific explanations of anything, or antinomy as the securing of the source is in fact not only a breach but a mockery of scientific method in particular, and of logical thought in general.
As to the antinomy, denying the applicability of law while using the laws of thought to say so coherently is a mockery not only of consistent thought, a laughable gaffe, but a bill-board of the reckless irrationality of man to escape the rule of law and of the Lord, who made both man and law, both those features internal to him and those provided externally, both the criteria and characteristics of mind and of matter in their operative domains, together with their interaction, as with the liberty to love or hate, deceiving others or even himself, indeed employing that function of arbitrary will in the realms of thought, reason, mind and matter, by which to deny his own inescapable source. The fidgets of philosophy do absolutely nothing to avoid this sophistry.
On this field, see also
Deity and Design, Designation and Destiny
Section 8, entitled.
Design, Nothingness, Anythingness,
Devious Irrational Devices, but
Critical Differentiae, List of Criteria relevant to thought
MAGIC AND MEANS
Right from the start of the more recent anti-philosophy, pro-sophistry movement of more recent times (say from the doped days of reckless Darwin's outburst in the mid-nineteenth century), there has been a staggeringly jejune and emptily thoughtless ignoring, in this debate, of MEANS. Reckless ? yes Darwin admitted he could not find the basic fossil evidence required for his theory. He hoped it might come.
His theory came anyway in a vast leap of imagination, confounding adaptive provisions as now traceable in the DNA, with creation in a thrust of dizzy bedazzlement. His effrontery in sidelining any god, and ignoring necessary means is now a standard for fallacy. This is effectually here, the naturalistic fallacy. It comes by omitting the invisible Maker of the invisible mind of man, and his invisible spirit with its invisible desires, designs, thought and vision, and living in a world of death to replace life, survival as source, not remnant. Later we plan to pursue this a little further.
What kind of a scientific theory precedes the evidence required for its basic structure. Supposedly the relevant evidence FORCES one into relevant hypotheses. He hoped for what would cover the case. In fact, Darwin stated that he found cruelty on earth too much for his thought, and so could not bring his mind to seeing God at work. In this he simply failed to realise one basic datum: human sin. If in the days of early Commonwealth of Australia, you were made criminal and shipped out in reeking ships with astonishing rules, it was not an anomaly (however the bad it was morally).
Sin finds you out, and sin in this world does so at many levels, and breach of reality brings collision with it, while disorder as confrontation with the Almighty, may readily bring divine retribution where mercy is despised and chronic evil insists on its personal chains. We are no angels, this world is no heaven; but heaven has intruded into it life and liberty, and liberty has smashed into it with vileness unspeakable, leading to evils increasingly near to unendurable, just as Jesus indicated would be the case (Matthew 24:22).
It is not only the earth which is in imminent danger of destruction, and not without reason; it is man in his own intimate outrageousness of thought and action, which threatens not only his constitution and coherence of thought, but his viability, his ability to live in wilful violation of the code and conditions of his creation, like rubbish assiduously preparing itself to qualify for its bin (cf. Matthew 24:5-12, II Timothy 3:1-8,13, 4:2-4, Hebrews 12:25-27, Mark 9:1ff.) .
Denying the plight of man is no basis for a scientific theory, but a mere revolt against both reason and its eternal source, for without that, it has no basis but contradiction. When DNA in its myriads of copies for next the generation's generation, even in one body, is refuted by will, and the bonds of bodily construction are ignored, and their denial is made either obligatory, mandatory or a mode to be followed or approved on pain of the law, you have a literal case of self-denial. Here the mental house is divided against the physical one!
Again, it is obvious that causality is inevacuable - that it cannot be removed from thought without breach and meaninglessness, which is no vehicle for meaning. Indeed, any attempt to ACCOUNT for the ground, basis or origin of causality itself, of what makes the world work with cause and effect, must necessarily USE it to show this! If you use something to show how it came to be, you are simply begging the question. What explanation is this, which uses a feature or function, to show how it arose ? That is, to account for it, you must first use it, which is a master stroke of antilogy. It is like telling how you made a million dollars by STARTING with that same million.
You need means for products*1, for pursuits, constriction and construction, and it has been the magically minded evolutionism which has ignored this in a misty romanticism with nature*1A, which has always astonished, even while as in the above case, in particular it may deny it! Thus we learn now that there are many mini-motors in the human genomic system, such as what is needed to compact and compile protein, motors of startling originality and incredible miniaturisation, with staggering speed required for the operations concerned. It has been pointed out that even a Cray computer could not touch the relentless speed of such operations.
Similarly, it is affirmed that without editing devices (of marvellous ingenuity), the better to conserve each generational copy of the DNA, no earlier production could long continue: error would simply swamp it*2 . Moreover, even translating code by inbuilt machinery requires the use of coded means to achieve this. Sarfati cites Popper's dictum on this: Thus the code cannot be translated except by using certain products of translation (Creation magazine 25(2), March 2003: 26-31). Accordingly, to produce something, you need some of its products for the purpose, precisely as in creation in general, where mental fluidity of thought and interactive correlatives are the very nature of the planning for overall presentation, and things may be presented from a mental continuum into a practical ensemble with synthetic pliability.
Indeed, you need not only logic in full relevance for such productions, but all means of action. You do not, as our chemistry teacher used to emphasise, just have chemicals 'arising', for that is mere ignorance. You need to define and assess the background in a reasonable manner to ACCOUNT for each thing. Hope and verbal blah are not chemistry but laziness of thought and ignorance of mind.
Just as the fact that the Eternally Competent Cause, Being, always had the abilities, for from absolute nothing none could come ever: SO man needs to secure the means of bringing his own (relatively) mini-matters in the field of creation and creativity, to pass. To be sure, God could hand out miracles, and often from experience one knows that He often does, though not normatively; but this does not mean that lesser beings like mankind, placed in a directed world, in general have no need to FIND the means.
Dying defectives do not create geniuses; non-survivors do not conquer the problems of constructing intelligence with its imagination, flexibility and artifices; and having things does not account for their having come! You need source, recourse, grounds, power, relevance, application, organisation if you want the results of these things to adorn the earth.
You need means, not magical references to what in terms of all observation and trial, lacks them. Reductionism*2A merely ignores part of the problem, leaving unanswered the basis, background and necessary directed power. Buzzing about with 'nothing' and subterfuge substitutions for it, cleverly hidden verbally, merely removes the rest of the question. The assessment of that, is simply nought, zero, dissociated irrelevance. You require grounds for your answer, not groundlessness. You require what it takes.
Do you hire a front-end loader, with driver, for needlework ? or use a babe for making watches ? As Christ challenged, do figs grow on thistles!
As for extending the
insuperable atheistic problem with 'multiverse' ideas, unproductive concepts,
since the production of one universe by these means, is already as shown not
only impossible but its base to be ludicrous, so to add the burden of having a
few has an almost drunken aspect: if you can't walk straight, invent a new
pavement. But multiplying impossibles while fascinating for a change, does not
work for rationality in any one of them. It becomes like having a group of
fail papers, in assessing exam results: every one adds to the dismal pile ...
Multiverse expansiveness only makes bad worse!
MAGIC AND METHOD
Means are required, at whatever level, to have things exist, except for what pre-existed our time, and so needed no means, being eternal. Forget this and you can forget all results, including ourselves; without the eternal God, it then has no logical basis, an isthmus in a sea that is not there*2B . One moment's absence of the Cause and Creator in the entire scope of total existence, in total nullity, and there is then nowhere for this Being and Power to come from, or anything at all, so leaving nothing, contrary to fact as the sum total of all things. A fine solution that is contrary to fact. The only alternative is AN ENTITY ETERNAL and with eternally adequate power, for the same applies to power as to anything else.
Indeed, as shown, you need cause, logic in full relevance, all means of action in a world of definable matter and life, to show HOW there come to be events that exhibit the power to make, craft, instal or instigate, provide, fashion and institute what a futile waft of a weary hand (not even there in the poetry of evolutionism) does not. This is so even if there were a hand to be weary.
Everything needs basis
except the base of everything, without which being there. nothing is left,
contrary to act and fact. Magic is once again the alternative, but this simply looks
to unspecified instrumentalities without evidence, instead of the opposite,
what acts with evidence, as indicated in the following Section.
Just think of the biological industry in our bodies. MOTORS, ingeniously miniaturised, empowered, applied, contrived fast-aid in myriads of motorised assignments in one integral whole. Consider this task specific or group task set of specialised units aggregative, bodies that empower process that is swift and routine, equipped to provide results that are spectacular, superbly synchronised, not only for such jobs as super-fast protein folding (no superannuation required for the motorised workers), but the dividing and rejoining of strands of DNA, the production of antibodies to match need, and so forth, all wonderfully miniaturised.
Thus, just as nothing continues to account for nothing, so means of doing things are necessity since imagination alone active does not invent the real presence of inventions but only their thought structure; so it is vain to imagine a godless beginning, specifications, translations, mutuality, joint timing of availability, all thrown in.
You might as well imagine a space craft factory 'arising' causeless and precise, with narrow specifications, because all the poor designs on the way to it, over time from the drafts people, were thrown away. The idea of creating them, even by vast effort, speedily is ludicrous. Matter does not work that way slowly or speedily by observation or intimation, empirically or in terms of structure. Plasticine equally can be very useful if a child wants to make things; but being merely material it has limits that require artful intervention by the child in this case, to secure the moulding, for the imagined outcome in mind; it needs input that is not mere material, for the immaterial construction pattern. easy or difficult as the case may be and the construction material for that input.
The means do not remove the need for the art of making, nor does the latter remove the means. It is causatively necessary to have the TYPE of thing we ourselves have continually within ourselves in our world, for results constitutively combining such features. There is no excuse for bewilderment either logically or practically. Creation is a type of thing and produces the style of result we ourselves for one element, exhibit.
The case with the construction of mankind is not only difficult, but far more difficult than man himself, even with the DNA sitting in front of him, can devise. Is it so humbling to be so utterly incompetent and feeble by comparison. Then it is possible to try something in mind and spirit, instead of wandering into fallacies: BE then HUMBLED. Vainglory does not even last and is illusory, a sort of metaphysical drug. Delusion is its offspring and desire its ground.
Needed for our own construction and without our aid in order to exist, are application, awareness, care and crafting, whether from automatic means or for their preludes in the sub-creation invention area itself, or in the form of preludes in task management itself. Imagination must reify its thought, institute and give constitution to its proposals for actual and active results.
Mindless me-no-knows do not suffice, and mentality is not provided by the management free of charge in any such model, where minds are by definition absent amid the imaginary truancies of the misconceived commencement of all things from the (productive) void (which also cannot then even exist, since it is not nothing but a magic for the institution of things). Instituting from a begging of the question base, through survival of the fittest when there are no examples for competition at first base, merely highlights the fact that eliminating poor copies says NOTHING on the means of instituting more advanced, sophisticated ones with more information fitted into the fantastically multi-purpose genetic arrangements, so that one change for one purpose readily means many butts that no longer work.
As Dr J.C. Sanford in his
Genetic Entropy stresses, myriads of copies over the generations,
of the DNA from one to the next, necessarily implies errors, and many of these
are associated with good features, so that when the actualities of selection
occur, much is always lost. The Second Law of Thermodynamics does not cease to
apply, and he cannot find even one unequivocal case of information advance in
kind, on the advance side. Moreover in an intriguing coverage of a large
number of new usages of non-protein coding DNA, involving something like a
spread of factories all making components and special features of the most
advanced kind in connection and capacity, he is able to say this (within
the coverage, pp. 40-44, op.cit.):
"It is becoming increasingly clear that most, or all, of the genome is functional. Therefore most mutations in the genome must be deleterious." Indeed, he notes on p. 45, that in a large gathering of geneticists in 2007, it was concluded that "most of the genome is transcribed, mostly in both directions, and that "most nucleotides are not only functional but poly-functional, having multiple roles."
The modes of non-protein making genes are startling in their complexity, their compoundings of functions including oversight and correction and means for the same, and many of these are involved in what appear genome-wide functionality, so that one view is that this type of DNA is more productive than 'mere' protein making operatives amid the myriad functions of the code, found ever-more complex with ever more functions, so that "the genome's functionality exceeds 100%." These genome wide patterns, Dr Sanford continues, "appear crucial to cell function, and suggest functionality throughout the entire genome." The poly-synthetic aspects of the operation of parts of the genome, in other words, are not merely regional but have integral implications.
That of course is precisely what is often found in high-level literary composition of great subtlety some with considerable ramifications. The human mind at the height of its creativity (cf. Bulletin one hundred & six) can be like that.
So many things are confused with the operations of the genome, as Sanford points out in considerable detail, but the actuality is something else.
It is in fact seen neither in practice, writing itself, nor in theory, involving the art of thought and the presence of cognitive manipulation of symbols by having their signification fixed and reliable. What is actually happening, he points out, is a relatively rapid degeneration towards entropy on the part of our genes, which are not selected one by one, but in significant groups, information lost in non-productive transfer not miraculously returning, and losses reflected in downgrading for the human race, a process, he notes, proceeding from the beginning of the genome.
It does not, as it cannot, continue for ever in this format, not only because energy is continually degrading in availability, but because lost information, however great the initial reservoir as in the case of the genetic composition of the body of man, cannot be reduced indefinitely without what is called a 'melt-down' or "error catastrophe."
Man is subject individually and racially to limits, even if his imagination is not.
Further, the whole concept over time of removing failures whether by non-survival or violence or any other method, is a ludicrous idea as a production unit. When empirically DNA myriads of defective failures in system do not populate the earth, NONE at all, the concept of nature as worse than a mindless buffoon achieving constructive wizardries is disjoined from reality, a child's cartoon not valid human thought. Cartoons ARE cartoons not least because they laughingly ignore the necessities of procedure. Failure does not cause success: this is not a pep talk arena but a reality realisation.
To replace what does not survive and its information quota, which reduces the gene pool, AFTER that, when replacement things are magicked into existence, it is no better. Removing foozles does not invent features. The ambiguous phrase survival of the fittest, does not mean achievement of creation. The vast explosion of DNA that is so often noted, in the early phases, is not now operative. It is not a scientifically traceable feature of our current universe, but having been instituted, stopped. THAT is one of the hall-marks of creativity. The thought-world-implementation by thought and purpose execution into the realm of the visible, is nothing automatic. It is controlled by
a) desire b) competence c) power
d) decision e) interest f) conceptual capacity
g) appropriate conscientiousness.
These are features of what we have, creativity that started and stopped and did not continue in the arena of vast designs; and in fact, as noted, in his Wonderful Life Stephen Jay Gould points out that most of the major designs deemed early or initial are now lost, compared with the first case. Time has lost, not gained.
Evolutionism has no productive base, 'chance' amid irrelevant incapacities merely providing movement of the deficient here and there, which does not reach into the required domains of coded information increase with integrated application, like changing engines slowly in a jet, with twiddles in its own vagaries of alteration. It is comedy not causal competence which is in view, and in fact a magnificent cartoon series could be created on this eruptively ludicrous basis.
Time in the speechless void, as in the question begged material world model as basis, as for any moron, provides nothing in the realm needed. It is capacity is required to surpass an endless parade of empirically useless and rationally unequipped consequences from the thought world of comprehension, consignment and information transfer, whether directly or indirectly, to the emplacement in the functional realities of how, to all observation and by all logic, this one works.
Competition notoriously does not help when there is none before anything arrives till duplication sets in on the totality, along with editing facilities to enable a first case to endure. Nothing is so utterly incompetent, and mindlessness so categorically inept.Small wonder the request: SHOW US ONE case where DNA type information is being coded into existence, as distinct from being moved around or becoming less intensive and it might help. It would help even more or an integrated bloc such as is needed, were shown to arrive from the nothing bin, if you ever could arrive there, since you would then not be nothing. The entire travail of lost thought and languishing logic is farce and fiasco, not function and empirically demonstrable ground even for investigation.
Pretending to be knowledgeable does not produce knowledgeability, nor does a pang produce a fashioned product (even if in the origins, you were actually there to have a pang).
Like money in some currency or other, or some form of purchasing power, you need it for purchase. No casually imagined dream of 'let time have a go' provides it; rather it is mentally applied relevance that is logically requisite. Usable material for the purpose must be provided. Thought needs to be reified, desire to be directed, for the universe is not a government department run on borrowed money before take-over by a foreign power, but a place where not only matter matters, but the mind that evaluates and disposes it. Needed likewise is the intensity that penetrates from one to the other, not in floating bits of wish without basis, but with wit, cohesive synthesis and integrally adequate componentry.
It is sheer haze to imagine magnificently multi-functional, optimally miniaturised mathematical systems "arising" to take part in an architecturally prepared site equipped with 'a multitude of mini-machines' and power tools dealing with symbolically expressed commands in speedy continuity with connotations to match realities which respond in an architectural prodigy ready for their installation. Architecture, as Dr Robert Carter pointed out, is as needed as the genetic machinery, just as a fast and effective cell wall is needed if any cell that contrived its existence, were to survive, even if in its vastly complex (minimal) form, it could arrive.
Indeed, the whole DNA enterprise involves assignment and consignment, symbols (like code or word, representative of reality, but not the actuality itself), definably indicative of what is in mind, so that maxi-miniaturisation of information may be achieved, collation or order and its execution in a massive managerial integration for which this world has nothing comparable in elevation and constructive ingenuity amidst the mightiest works of man at the management level. His greatest work is himself; and as to that, he did not do it! as Psalm 100 so succinctly and perhaps a trifle ironically points out; but he enters on it as a nearly mindless infant, gradually awakening as his donated faculties reach their appointed powers, as prescribed within, so that then after much coddling, he is able to seek to follow the script followed in his own slow construction over the earliest months, and first years.
By these coded, time-delayed processes and maturings, you arrive in a world of thought, imagination, coherence and required capacities to realise that thought, using basic materials, such as matter. Where creation itself is concerned, matter though a marvel in itself, is only a basis for action, its powers of governing institution, subordinate to those of mind which can manipulate and engage with it, in a universe of graded capacities, those of matter, mind and spirit. Ignoring this is productive, but only of confusion; ignoring necessary causation is abandoning the means for argument.
As you grow from infancy to maturity, you graduate in this way into the field of logic, thought and understanding by which alone as to equipment, you can then find your place, an invented inventor, not a mentally irrelevant butt of sub-moronic capacity as an illusory race.
So great is the overall organisational architecture, we learn, that a million symbols might fit on a millimetre of surface, and this as in musical creation, is part of an allocation and composition of options and actualities, methods and instrumental items, in one vast mass of prodigious creativity. Similarly an artfully prepared musical score does not play anything but is a meaningless jumble until the interpreter of these symbolic assignments with agreed meaning, are read, applied, the necessary instruments found with the necessary aptitudes and combinations in cause and effect, interpreted aptitudes. You need to think. Thought needs a mind, for it too has a cause. Mind needs a will, for to see how is not to do it.
In this, the command-conquest side (like an orchestra with its conductor) requires a response read-out collation, the conductor often having personal additives, multi-task function with his baton and other modes of expression. In our case, apart from divine intervention as judged fitting, the Lord has it all programmed with specifications for limited response to conditions. Again, just as in an orchestra set in its opera house, so this in us is its assigned location for activation. The baton does not re-write the music, but it responds to it in the setting of the performance, just as life does, with its variable and invariant planes of researched performance aligned, each at different levels.
The baton creates neither the music nor the musicians, but it directs them into assigned coherence, combinations, modes and order for the ultimate purpose. The spirit of man is creative, the mind can be rational; and it all requires discipline, though a wonderful freedom is given so that incoherent thought can be obstinately and even obstructively made into a religion, that does not quite like to own itself as such, though in staking out its criteria for all, it is one.
In these sorts of symbol-item assignation, an arrangement of letters (such as nucleotides) of necessity contains a mental-imagination constraint of logical character, to ensure reliable effects. Where ? Why in the actualities to which they relate, as in any other ordered intellectual function of this type. It works because it is filled with carefully expressed, programmatically suitable knowledge which has exact equivalence in the things themselves, that obey! No conductor achieves his work with no orchestra, should he waive it and not his visible baton. This expressiveness is not assignable by (literally) dumb matter, though the latter can be used, as may plasticIne by a child. Nor is its disposition in ingenuities of manufacture, a facility secreted in it. Nothing such shows, but intelligence in its construction, as a pervasive reality, does.
Since, moreover, as already noted, intellectual objects are not found to operate without mind (direct or through its programmatic constructions), mind with its analytical powers is required to engender this species of result, just as in turn, mind not being found without a degree of relationship to will, for example to follow what one's mind has or defy it as people often do, this spiritual aspect is inseparably annexed. To try to divorce these things from their own various bases in organisational synthesis is not a case of scientific method, but its reverse.
What does it resemble ? It is like a frightened (or wilful) horse which rears or stamps or acts dangerously or most inconveniently and simply will not keep its feet on the ground, or its mind on its task, or its thought on the way if it is to proceed. Emotions with much whinnying may thus replace its norms; and it is built to be able to do this, for will has a part, be it right or wrong. It is a function; and in man, a highly organised facility with its own criteria, capacities including rationalising for the protection of pride.
These realms have been with staggering artistry and thought brought together, symbols and the signified, program and personality, thought and will, liberty and rebuke, in that three-tiered realm, where man is powerless; for though he has spirit, he cannot create freedom. He either uses it or loses it; but when his Maker is apprehended, then the mind that made being available, and so truth and freedom alike. Some even begin to know and understand their Creator, but then rush from the presence in invisible revolt, in their invisible wills, for their invisible reasons.
Let us revert then to the world of visible record and viable life on this earth. Data are found and need to be interpreted. Scientific method is one specialised logical art in doing so (cf. Scientific Method...).
That method looks for what accounts, not for what discounts, and there is nothing else. Darwin's tensions about suffering are not here relevant, though it seems they limited and to some extent even controlled his thought. He appears to have been spiritually stranded, not realising that the human race is a strikingly sinful one, at macro and micro-levels, one with no small measure of uncongenial, destructive use of mind, body and spirit. As in parallel with an unserviced car, sin involves suffering, the scale of the one in much relating to that of the other! There are also secondary consequences.
Even abhorrence of sin (if found in anyone) does not remove the necessities of constructing first the freedom and the means for the sinner for example to love (without which sin has no basis). No freedom implies no sin, no rationalisation, no self-sacrifice, merely routine programmatics at the pleasure of the maker. Where liberty is not present, error is not apportionable. However man's liberty to lampoon his Creator, mock his very genes (as now increasingly the fashion, in effect), slaughter his fellows, rob the vulnerable, oppress the weak is vast. The power of the Maker of his thought and mind and spirit and body has this to consider, the work of man in manhandling His product.
Man though often orderly and sometimes virtuous, even if frequently wilfully ignorant of his Maker, is on show constantly in his works, including delight in cruelty, irrationality, in confusing other people by the same, remorseless hatred, revenge, self-magnification, hypocritical pretences and pretensions to deceive, on reflection as the best way and so on. Power to mentally dismiss the causative Maker of Mentality, the Institutor of logic, the facilities for function by a propaganda philosophy touted even in schools supposedly teaching truth, not fostering delusion, is one more aspect where passion in liberty and liberty in passion misfashion the race. What is found in implication in the programmed linguisitic marvel of DNA, in man the product, is also found dynamically operative as a function of his living spirit and investigable, investigating mind. This has been so for thousands of years in billions of cases with assignments permitting areas of freedom, far beyond man's power to impart in his own creations.
The immaterial power to avoid dictation by matter or the dictates of what is not there in this fanciful regimen is like the rest, donated by the Existence-Maker, the Matter-Maestro and the Logical Thinker. Liberty does not pre-judge the mode of its use! Liberty is trial and test, and its evaluation by man and his Maker, leads to result. Tumultuous, self-centred, delusively organised turmoil and spoliation of man by his fellow man is no small operation; and no small result is operative. Priorities, vision, perspective, pondering, species of insight, all are involved in the outcomes to love or to hate, oneself, one's Maker or one's works, to gloat or to rejoice. It is necessary to be beyond or to be so connected, what merely transpires in order to assess it, and so speak truth about anything, instead of reactive chatter. Man is not so beyond, but his Maker is.
By this he can be enabled to
know and speak truth; without this, man can neither exist nor logically speak
whatever fallacy he has in mind in accounting for things. It is systematically
excluded by the agnostic, atheist model. From the truth, he may speak the
truth; but he must first find it.
THE WORK, WISDOM AND WAYS OF THE ETERNAL BEING
THE ETERNAL BEING
What then is the evidence, beyond the necessity for creation, concerning this SUPER-NATURAL Being, the maker of nature, its laws, programs, fixtures, tolerances and intolerances at various levels ? First of all, this Being has to have eternity as already shown, independence, for otherwise the controls over Him would require a more ultimate being, and we would be talking of something else, for no reason.
Again, purely as to procedure, it is good to use the biblical "He", not because male is better, but because in the biblical mode, male has a degree of presidency, allied to a willingness to sacrifice himself for the wife, which makes this nomenclature judicious. Man and wife are "heirs together" as Christians (I Peter), in eternal life; but people who do not understand authority and love, will twist this almost as if writhing. It is but one result of what I Corinthians 2:12ff. tells us is a feature of unspiritual thinking. Gender equality is not needed for it is not present. Maleness and femaleness are not the same. In effect, gender in people for production of our race, male and female, is different in design, complementary in function, essential for continuance of the race. Further, reproduction is even optional, the means given.
Equality of WORTH of those different in this mode of continuing this creation, yes THAT IS a principle to hold; but the equipment is not the same, is not found identical in all things and the differences at various levels are often discussed and sometimes researched.
Certainly God in eternity is neither male nor female, these being created categories, but since Christ came to earth in terms of mankind, and God in His coded creative thrusts and additives made man and woman, this is the obligatory way of referring to it. If you want to change these things, write your own Bible ... and sell it!
With God, the Eternal Being, He is always there, the same, in need of nothing. For His Being, reproduction is a contradiction in terms. With man, ephemeral in body, though substantially maintained for a good period, there is necessity for reproduction for the original phenotype to stand. What for the One would be ludicrous, for the other is essential. To talk of One in terms of the other is, as appears fairly normal in anti-God notations, simply confusion. Yet some, dictatorially inclined, now want this! No more 'Lord' say they subversively of Christianity, thus attesting that intolerance of divine rule and thought, institution and execution, which rebounds on earth in more and more clash, as if man were a fellow god, not a creation. Thus the one kind of fault leads to another, and both proceed where illusion normally does, as in that created by other kinds of mind-affecting drugs, actual or metaphorical.
Who are these who would re-write the religion of Christ! Let them make their own, and in this land, leave it free as the Commonwealth Constitution solemnly and categorically requires (Section 116). Freedom of religion does not require atheistic or agnostic nomenclature. That is force, its antithesis.
Re-writing the word of God is similar to re-writing the message of God, and wise are they who do not dump the word of deity in favour of some inkling of desire of their own (cf. I Corinthians 2:9-13). Confusing issues is perhaps for some a good political trick, but it is a disastrous failure to think. We thus in this model express it as it is , not in terms of some other model, a too popular form of confusion and dictation.
Indeed, God is not mutable, subject to clouds of distemper, nor amoral, subject to scrutiny by man as a wrong-doer, for man is made in His image, and as He is in reality so is man in obligation for the working of himself, as what is made. If God were mutable, variable, then He would need to achieve change to become satisfactory for himself, and so subject to whatever made him, in the first place, with this defect; but that leaves merely a word, for the ultimate and necessary ground is God.
God is not amoral, for if He were in need of satisfaction from manipulation of, cruelty or misuse of what He has made, then as before, a superior power and maker would have made him so, so that we would not be talking of God, but just of a word with no denotation. God, in the way shown before, is before and beyond all psychic, political, profiteering, having all things as He desires, and a god of that type is merely an empty substitute. It would once again be but a figure, if such, for it would mean that either He did not yet have enough without this, or had a psychic kink so that although having enough, He yet wanted more in an imperious grasp or some such defective condition, which again would leave Him held in felt inadequacy and merely a symbol with a symptom: not the God who acts independently and adequately without aid.
Ch. 1, of The Shadow of a
Mighty Rock, such elements as these and more are reviewed in detail,
but here we are looking at a brief overview to see perspective and within
initial consideration, the nature of God, religion and in
particular, Christianity, since it has a positive proponent who (at last) does
not (at best) say, Do what I say, not what I do, but instead, and unabashedly,
Follow Me! We are not talking of insert gods, but of what is foundational to
matter, mind and spirit, independent making existence dependent (cf. Hebrews
1:1-3). It is always better when surveying Models of thought, not to compound
and so confound in obscurity what is being said, mixing your model with tht of
someone else, but when ready for testing, to
outline what is the case, and then compare models accurately and truthfully.
THE AMAZING ACTION OF THE ULTIMATE EXPERIMENTAL TEST
Let us first consider the contrast, sharp as the finest razor.
In a world of brilliance and dulness, high aspirations for man and low deeds by man, often dipped in the dyes of hypocrisy (such as having a Constitution for a country guaranteeing freedom of religion and then actively legally assaulting those who peaceably USE it), where we find explosive self-destruction with a reckless character, that threatens mankind's very existence, as if the world were jointly owned and our beings had dedicatedly invented themselves along with law and logic from nothing, and then gone mad with varied aspirations and confusions, along with ill-will and idle thrill, rather like a child wanting to blow up his father's house or at least run it, we still have some time. There is still time for pause ... even thought!
Man is indeed and has been subject to many rebukes, both vast and more limited, whether from astronomical objects, inundation or devastation self-wrought or divinely determined (as in Genesis 6), amid his unfathomable seeming follies, wild sprees, and callous cruelties, abuses, oppressions, heartless pursuits, often well understood as to their impact, and yet done. What evidence is there of divine response, disjunction, rebuke or challenge ?
First, there is the very contrast. It includes the exquisite provision and amazingly brilliant forms of rebuke amid the teeming wonders of the world, in utter diversity. Yet the forms of rebuke which are exceedingly numerous, can be as staggeringly ingenious as the format of creation. Take a mosquito, a pest for pests in which like much else, some evils from some may bring trouble to others as well (as when fertile swamps are left to lie as in Israel before the Jews came back it and had to bear with them before they were drained). One does not have to be a biologist to know for example of that insect's available instrumentation for being led to the prey, for piercing the skin, passing of fluids and so on. When one sees figures of each of these ingenious provisions, it reminds one of a surgeon about to set to his task.
Plagues of flies, including the March variety, ants, locusts, grass-hoppers, astutely equipped snakes, potential inhabitants where peace might be hoped for, gulping crocodiles for the waters and radioactivity to disadorn the whole environment of man: all are provided in ways which threaten threatening man in his wars, with worse. Some of these man makes, others are given; all are there.
Anguish and heart-break are added, as man assails man, this in addition to natural calamities jointly to leave in calamitous contrast the peaceable places, peoples, sites of sound morals, and serene and productive landscapes almost as if a dream for the natural man in his natural world, without God.
The very unlovable lavishness with which hard-headed, stony-hearted grabbers and bashers (people or nations) seek to qualify for greatness or riches not their own, is like a shock course in mental therapy. Indeed, therapy for wickedness and witless wandering as if we were not made, making nothing of us as to source, can be vast, and leave vast results as in World War I and II and the Cold War, the Muslim wars and the Anti-God wars becoming more and more fashionable, as if gender were not inbuilt and commanded by billions of orders inside each person, like it or not, and we could happily play Russian roulette with what for some are attractive changes.
Costs in all these wars can be and often have been extreme. Not all always can avoid war when attacked, but how many are provocative in the first place, geared for greedy gain and to take the labours of others and use them, grabbing and assigning the long-term toilers, some sent even to Siberian camps where the victims would labour till death ended their State-run facilities and the maximum was sought from the reserves of the victims. Siberia was not in mind for those interested in getting their own land, returning weary and stricken, during World War I. Devious deceit and luminous lordliness are frequent supply sources for woe
Wars of aggression, of defence, and rabid wars abounded and abound with the moral tone just as Christ Himself predicted (Matthew 24). The cost to the psyche of many of the following generations has been extreme, leading to new phases of disillusion, disregard and social dyspepsia, more and more saturated with cynics, sceptics and the often luxuriously indulged or indulgent targets of social care. With the plagues whether insect-borne or man-made, of biological weapon or natural assaults, man in his vulnerability is vitally exposed, but like a tempestuous child, can dismiss all these eruptions with more impudence yet towards God, like a wild motorist being pursued at high speed through city areas, by police.
As to the last episode, they often end their forays in impact with a tree or other obstruction to their rampages, and such cases are short. But mankind has a long-term move as predicted (I Timothy 4, II Timothy 3 and 4, Matthew 24), towards greater and greater evil, and all this is proceeding as outlined in the prophets of the New and Old Testament in no little detail (cf. SMR Chs 8 and 9 and see Isaiah 59).
Thus there is the written evidence and the smitten attestation, fortified by the just call for such consequences for such a race with such gifts at such a time, flirting with fate, where God is not regarded, and one increasingly focussing folly as if the most precious jewel. Even what was repentant in some degree, even what accepted remedy, as time moves on, amid the nations, now like flowers of evil, blooms not with fragrance but odour, and imitates trash. Drugs populate much of many populations, and some live by selling death. Illusion being present by desire in mind, is becoming fortified by chemicals, as when a snow flurry becomes a storm.
Far is God from waiving away all these devastating, destructive and deranging activities, modes and lust; but the Gospel continues amid all this as foretold that it would (cf. Romans 1, II Thessalonians 2, I Corinthians 4:6ff., II Corinthians 4:7ff.). It does so amid just such declines, deteriorations and disasters of those whom through it the Lord seeks, indeed will continue until mankind could no longer continue, unless this same Jesus Christ, the predicted Saviour should Himself return. Conditions for this are imminent and eminently on display (cf. Matthew 24, Luke 21, and SMR loc. cit..
The evidences of divine wrath*2C over His brilliant, freedom-endowed and magnificent creation are a pageant in themselves as to method, depth, scope, impact and very often, restraint. The One over all is having His gifts in the Gospel and wrath in the world alike shown, and with the many mercies which have prolonged this race so far already, there is a positive drama exhibiting the rising tempo of folly, and its results.
There is a limit, a couple of thousand years is a fair trial, and many are the mercies on the way towards its now almost visible prospect!
THE PROPERTY OF GOD
Now to consider is the scope of the assault on divine property and the call for collision, with the results of it.
Many may imagine that God does not care about human suffering, or its evil imposition for self-aggrandisement, pride and satiated lust; but the idea that the prodigies of information and executive aptitude put into our bodies and beings, not to mention our spiritual apparatus are of no value to Him, is mere slack folly. It is HIS equipment and He MADE it, and He has left inviolate testimony of why He made it, how it is to go and what is the available consequence of various options, for good or for evil.
It is evident that to lay violent hands on the property of another, including ourselves as the divine property, is an insolence, and where God is the owner, an abysmal assault, a gross arrogance and unchecked impudence. It is wrought by man, in masses, against man; and by man against God's property in him. True, God has given us liberty to use (cf. The Meaning of Liberty and the Message of Remedy), and without that neither good nor evil could be done, and this privilege merely permits righteousness or folly.
Since it is one more gift, the question is one of its use, evaluation of the same (not by man alone, but by God as its source), and the actions of man are a good parallel to the severity of punishments, though there are remarkable times of comparative quietness to allow natural products of good or evil to accrue (cf. Psalm 107, Romans 11). Now some might be tempted to say this: I am not personally responsible for the wars, and I do (sometimes) try to be good (though admittedly I define what that is), and so I am feeling cramped.
Such might occasion this reply: Have you from the first even known God, and if not, have you been using His personally made equipment and the delusive ideas often associated (you pick your own), and that, it is nothing ? But if you really want to get off, to void the connection with what is visibly both in much running and ruining the world, then you have a quietly effective opportunity.
There is provided in the only testable (and in this passing, with vast and even rampant success) religious writing claiming to have come from God Almighty, the Bible, a way for such and for any indeed. REPENT (says Christ in Luke 13's account), or (in effect) perish. A tower fell on some : and this led to the impending question: why on them in particular ? In His reply, Christ made it clear that repentance is needed to escape the generic condition of the race: individual repentance, what Luke calls repentance to life (Acts 11:18). From that, like an appeal to a helicopter for saving people by removal from a stricken vessel at sea, comes the turning in heart to God, the regeneration of life and the sealing in of pardon, as one proceeds to His coming and the resurrection (Romans 3:23ff., II Timothy 4:7-8, I Corinthians 15, Philippians 3:20-21). It is not hard for the Maker to bring in Mark II. Creation is not attrition but imagination into action by power.
If, however, one on the ship has no concern about it, or him/herself, then so be it. That is the response, view and action, and so will the result be fitted to it. Disdaining faith in your Maker and the only Saviour offered to man in the name of God alone, is not an avenue to Him. To insult Him in this way is like calling a doctor a quack, and departing without a required antibiotic.
The direct and sequentially oriented proof is provided in SMR, for instance, in all detail, over some 850,000 words of enquiry and pursuit, leading to confirmation of the Gospel (as in Philippians 1:7, II Cor. 10:5), which continues to save and transform sinners, whether some believe it or not. As Christ made clear, relatively few enter - but by no means absolutely few (cf. Matthew 7:13ff., Revelation 7).
We need to realise that there
is not only affront in what man does to man, as if the property were his own, but
there is theft. It is infinitely worse than, but in essence similar to,
walking into your neighbour's property and hacking into his beloved trees,
ripping up his flower garden and leaving street-talk on his path! The answer
must be, and is felt; but how far below what it might be!
THE PROPOSALS OF GOD AND
THE WORD OF GOD
But let us pursue our objective more explicitly, if briefly: the question is there an explicit word from the Almighty to the human race - that is, other than the DNA which involves multitudes of explicit words about constructing each generation BY ORDER as given. What about the mind of man ? Our race in general can read, absorb, evaluate, find comprehension, ponder points ... Is there then indeed a word on deep things, not mere superficially conceivable commands to the body, but provided for the mind, heart, spirit, to inform, advise, stir and penetrate to man ? Yes, for thousands of years, the Bible has come from prophets and Jesus Christ Himself, who has also as in great detail predicted and fulfilled; and each time it makes a prediction or even made one concerning the lifetime on earth of the Lord Jesus Christ, it is tested.
After some quarter of a century investigating such issues, one can find none that fails; but on the contrary (cf. Magnificence of the Messiah, SMR Ch. 6), one finds especially focussed in Him such an account of input and response when He came, as to leave an imprint which has never begun to pass away; for in even one category, the Bible has long continued to be reported as the most sold book in the world. How otherwise when it is subject to CONTINUAL testing because of continuingly relevant predictions, concerning the present time and continual rampagings from those who hate it, often clamoring more or less directly, to be gods. But God acts uniquely as God and in His proven powers, there is simply no competition.
Indeed, as shown in The Shadow of a Mighty Rock and elsewhere on this site, there are so many specific fulfilments in my own generation as to be generative of a whole picture with many parts in multiple presentation. One can see its trend, its elements, its development, its causes, its cure, all there and securely provided. God charges, challenges, concludes and acts; often saying so centuries or millenia before it happens.
It also provided two further aspects. The first is its coverage of the case, back to the beginning, including cause and effect in the nature of history. God did not dally (Genesis 3:15), but at once, when sin entered, entered against it the announcement of the Gospel solution. The account is adequate, deep but not at all mysterious and meets in consistency all aspects of the case, which man loves to ignore until catastrophe (often but not always) gives some pause.
The second point is the remedy for the case, for it is not left as if it did not matter to Him who did so much to make so much so utterly brilliantly (always remember that brilliant manipulations impressed on matter are not made by, but put into matter: that is its tested quality).
The third is similar in character; the mercy in the case is prodigious so that man is not left with vast insights while God his Maker lacks them; but on the contrary, God Almighty was willing not only to communicate with man, but even willing and active in exposing Himself to shame and agony and anguish and that in patience to the foolishness of man, in order that man might find the wisdom of God (cf. I Corinthians 1). As purged of purely human ideas in its message and pronouncements, being the word of God, the Bible consistently not only indicates its origin, but demands adherence as of authority to what has been authorised, in the case of man, a limited life span in the image of God and an offer of eternal life by a divine grace of staggering proportions.
In accord with these premises, you find a massive array of biblical declaration concerning the origin, the nature and the endurance of the word of God, in terms relating to Himself. These include I Corinthians 2:9-13, Matthew 4:4, 5:17-20, Revelation 22:18-19, Psalm 111, Isaiah 14:27, 59:21, 41:21-29, 45:18ff., 46:10, 48:3-19, I Peter 1:22-25, Galatians 1, II Corinthians 11:1-15. The word of God sets its own standards, and nothing else comes near either in magnitude of test, or result, to this divine display.
The character of the words, in the biblical presentation, and their charter in conforming history to themselves, could not be clearer, whether in declaration, decisiveness, direction, results, modulation, majesty, message or singularity. Indeed in the Bible, there is one great singularity, and this is not some aggregation of forces and other question begging insertions into alleged beginnings. On the contrary, it is the sufficient cause of creation in its actual occurrence: One sufficient for it, eternal and hence in no need of 'arising' as naturalists often ascribe to nothing; it is one nature of one Saviour who acts for those who receive Him. When He speaks, time is not a harassment or challenge, but a medium, like ink for the pen of man.
But what of the testimonial evidences, say, of Islam ? It was not made available till very late in the scene and scenario: about 600 A.D..
It is related to the non-Jacob line of Ishmael, and this is not the one specified in the long preceding Bible, concerning these affairs (Genesis 25-26, 35*3), but it was decisively and dramatically from Jacob the blessed Abrahamic line was to proceed quite expressly. God defined His will and wish most clearly. There was no change or diversion, except that from rejected Ishmael there would be resistance enough, which duly came to pass.
Islam has no remedy for mankind, but only prayers and works which might lead, or might not, where they want to go. Far less is it (which is not provided reliably at all, but which might come) a work of God Himself, reliable as He is, nor is it freely given, leaving open subtle question like this: Is 51% performance a pass ? or 49:7 ? God has resolved all, simplified all, clarified all in His salvation by grace only through faith only, by gift only, leaving no room for pride in those who are being removed from ruin by divine wise, effective and effectual benevolence (Romans 3:23ff., Ephesians 1-12). Jason Lisle also points out in his work, The Ultimate Proof, p. 56, that since the god they propose is said to be utterly different from man in all, therefore logic cannot be common to both, so conditions of intelligibility are not fulfilled, making a revelation from this source inadequate even for understanding.
The Koran therefore remains not only a book without proof of its evidential conviction, but one with proofs of several kinds that it clashes within itself, or fails for itself, or falls in its failures to provide, setting before man too late for his history, with no remedy, only a path for effort and hope. Indeed, as in the Koran as earlier indicated, the Hebrew prophets are cited as from God, while the Koran in its teaching is utterly contradictory to their message, you have a procedural entanglement and self-contradiction. If trying to relate to the far earlier and much attested realm of the Old Testament, it was convenient for the leader of Islam to give some degree of approval to this, yet in so doing, he utterly outlawed his whole message, which is in massive confrontation with that of the Hebrews prophets (cf. His Wounds Opened Eternity, Ch. 4).
Indeed, Islam utterly repudiates the CONTENT of the biblical message, was often highly clamorous, its specialists subjugating Jews, denying the Bible as containing remedy and Christ as God in the flesh. It even gives contrary accounts of the death of Christ*4.Thus it fails before what does give evidence, what is not founded on contradiction and evidentiary inadequacy.
When you are dealing with God, heaven, salvation and hell, you need the uttermost; and the Bible and Jesus Christ who came as for centuries predicted, and history which for centuries has moved as He predicted, together with logic and evidence in which the Bible specialises (I Peter 3:15, Philippians 1:7, Isaiah 41, 48), all have but one home for man relative to himself as created. Tested, he is warned, but also given munificent offer and gifted with remedy for his situation on earth and in heaven.
Indeed the BIBLE HAS ANCIENT TESTIMONY, COVERING THE CASE FROM THE FIRST FALL OF MAN, AND LIKEWISE PROVIDING NOT A MERE MYSTERY, BUT AN ANSWER, A REMEDY NOT ONLY FOR THE INDIVIDUAL, BUT FOR THE ENTIRE RACE, FROM THE FIRST. The case and what led to it is expounded, explained, applied, shown remedy so that it does not merely sit as if a contradiction, failure without provision and yet continuation for the race, which would indeed be a mystery. Wonders remain for awe, but clarity for action. There is point, there is purpose and there is program, which may or may not be opted, as foreknown in the wisdom of God, and His unremitting desire for man, yet without force.
Without that, all systems fail, and centuries pass in collision with god unanswered, though He has the power to correct, or would otherwise have an abuse of His name and property against His creation, ineffectually tolerated. But the case is not so. God had stated and provided the answer, the meaning, the point of a continuing earth*4A; He did not fade into ineffectual incompetence and needless continuance of mere rebellion. He had plans. He had redemption, in mind, to be performed, a whole history of wonder and mercy, and in the Bible, later in Christ Himself, in this aggregate of the living and written word of God, He showed it.
Christianity is the religion which meets this, explains it, provides it. It is one of divine acts (Isaiah 64:5), facts, testimony, culminating in the coming of God personally not merely to inspect, but to remonstrate, demonstrate and perform the sacrificial miracle required, and do so in a love to match the devoted detail put with such labour into our exhibit: the format of our own beings!
But what of Hinduism and Buddhism from an evidential and logical viewpoint ? They have problems of trying to have one (whatever) as all or all as one. All as one ? There can, however, be no compilation of what are opposites as one (SMR pp. 995-1008, 1012-1014, 1085-1086). There is and can be no one constitutive of all the clashing contrasts in this cosmos, world and universe, composing the opposites, comprising the utterly diverse, whether destruction or instruction. Simply making one to be the mantra, the natural 'all', the ground removed, leaving the cause inconsequential - is a denial of the question. As in any exam, that does not rate a mark at all.
As for one is all, the Buddhistic*5 emphasis, what is this one ? is it the creator of all the rest and the system or the stories of gods ? Are many one ? No, this is that religious purge from Hinduism to Buddhism. If one totality, holus-bolus is one (and you don't worry about why or how), then it is mere atheism with all its failures to answer, far less address all the questions: from what cause, by what means, from what source for the trilogy of properties called mankind! It is in that respect indistinguisable from non-religion ( cf. SMR 995-1026).
The gods, then ? They go, existence continues. What existence ?
Is it self-making ? has it no cause ? How does it tell you the truth when it is merely a system, not an exposition of one in overall, supervisory terms ? And if it cannot, why consult it, and if there is no answer, why talk about it. It is in the end, the same as before.
On what basis is evidence provided of so many gods doing so many things in so many ways ? But take the purge of Hinduism in Buddhism, we are left merely with a meaning-avoiding atheism, telling us what it cannot know, with no possibility even of finding truth amidst the turmoiled oddments, however they might be addressed.
But what else covers the case ? there lie gods of all sorts in some way populating things without evidence or system, in their various pads or properties. It is an imaginative venture, but one having nothing to support it; and where did the one system in which these visionary beings exist come from or they, and why and what is their remedy for what is caught in it, whether creatively or destructively inclined ?
Actions as such are not remedy, and imagination is not establishment! In this world; but cause and consequence continue and these are persistent. Yet systematic causation itself in our universe needs its own causation, source, and base, and nothing short of its Creator can account for it, since all other natural ideas of its source, simply assume it there and then proceed to use it to explain how it got here! Anything without God has to go through such exposures of incompetence, inadequacy, self-contradiction as here, or more or all.
The Bible however speaks of the eternal God. There is no logical trouble with having an Eternal Being showing Himself as He will, whereas the ultimate alternative of 'nothing' has nothing to show or to do anything else, and is a meaningless fudge for the unwary.
When things that run down are presented, and when this starts, and in the case both of energy and life, runs down, then we need to know precisely what ran them up, made and fortified them, gave them laws as to their being, mode of operational, degeneration and so on. In the Bible, the Creator is found defining, predicting, asserting, negating the florid fantasies and confronting the sins of man, providing testable detail in a matrix of cover made available to man, while providing remedy from the first and sustaining this to the last. The surrounds for this, as predicted, are now raining down upon us, into history like a tempest. Through the word of God, here the history is self-interpreting!
In the end, those who reject the conditions for continuance which been allowed to proceed, form part of the population of the earth. This situation has proceeded long enough to exhibit a tutelary history, means of evaluation of its philosophic flurries and possessed propositions; and these in turn have led to the deaths of scores of millions, as if shame were too large to be able to sit, and had to remain standing. What of them ?
They receive what they had due. Refuse remedy, as in cancer, and you must face the result to the point at last. In delayed time, it may become irremediable as it was always intractable, except by grace, which however is grandly operative in the Gospel, which staggeringly is free. Love is like that. The love of God is not rationed, nor is God gulled.
Proverbs 1 gives a delightfully short and deep exposé of this process, in much a regress, for which there is appalling end; just as the last part of Proverbs 8 gives a further facet of an enthralling alternative. Blessed are those who diligently wait for HIm, and it continues, all who hate Him, love death.
Outside the Bible, in the area of claimed, coherent words attributed to God on adequate logical grounds, there is nothing. Beyond and outside it, there is not even anything with logical validation, verification and demonstration available*6. The biblical faith meets every query of its message as with a flash, with regal bearing untouched and rich content pouring out to meet the trumpet.
It exposes itself freely to all logical and heuristic enquiry, meets the serious, rejoices the studious, abides undeterred though often attacked, and exposes patiently as might a doctor talking to a child, precisely what is wrong, and most mercifully where the remedy is and how to reach it. These are features found and recorded in practice, worship, prayer and research continually.
Inside there is such a perfect consistency of ideas, standards, attitudes, approaches, actions, forecasts, grounds and expositions that it is a delight to savour them, for questions are met, critiques are exploded, things aggressively assailing it, are shown themselves to be inconsistent, as in addition to assume what lacks any basis, or grinds with other assumptions. In the 242 volumes on this web site over more than a quarter of a century in compilation, few stones have been left unturned, and delightful discoveries have been attested, as in the realm of predestination and freewill.
This not only meets challenge, but provides the only available answer (see the thesis, Predestination and Freewill, and relevant Bulletins *7 of the last year or two, together with Volume 7 of the Set on the subjects involved. The Bible provides as there shown, not only grounds for rejecting misconstructions in this field, but what is logically the only basis for this magnificent field of predestination, freewill and all the many lively components to be found in this field from any source.
Indeed, God made it even easier (John 5:24, John 10:9,27-28) by making this man Jesus Christ to be born into our race, even His incarnate Word (HE expresses Himself not only in writing but in His personal expression, His living word).
Sent from heaven, He constitutes the yes-no test, the switch that has no switch-back, the switch that works. Moreover He is personal for persons being their basis, discerning as only a person can be, knowledgeable as only God can be, voluntarily leaving glory behind for the work in the trenches of sin and shame, to rescue, Yet retaining complete and continual access as needed, even on this front line, to His Father (John 8:29, 12:48-50), His display of power and presence, grace and wisdom, understanding and man never failed.
The great breach came when bearing sin for others, He cried (Matthew 27:43), as predicted a millenium before (Psalm 22:1), "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me." In dying for sin that separates, as in Isaiah 59:1ff., He bore the desolation, before committing His Spirit to the Father. Indeed, with all this, He was humble as man (to be realistic) must be, and the breaker of two necessary challenges.
First, He atones for sin by redeeming the lost (pardon is open for the taking - Isaiah 55:1-7, John 3:15-18,5:24), and He ardently desires that those sought receive Him for this purpose (Colossians 1:19, Matthew 23:37, Luke 19:42ff.).It is this which is wrought with a realism that could lead Him to weep for what was through pure rebelliousness of spirit on the part of many (Luke 19:41ff., Matthew 23:37ff.), neither consigned nor programmed; though it was foreknown with its adversity (Ephesians 1:4).
Where wilfully lost, it was deplored, and Christ wept. However, how vastly faithful and gracious is He, who spoke of withheld final condemnation, concerning those who had not heard His words, nor seen His deeds (John 15:21-23, 9:39-41). Judgment is neither light in cause nor slight in method. Matters are weighed (Psalm 11), but the wages of sin is still death unless the gift of grace by grace is received. Indeed, for those who hate, displace or reject God, life in a heaven of praise and realisation might seem like a special hell!
His divine love is no facade or verbal flurry, but He WILL NOT use violence of any kind, psychic or physical, to pervert the truth, convert reality or shanghai the impenitent. Here is lovingkindness in its definitive exhibition and expedition. It is He who has covered in offer to all (I John 1:7, 2:1-2), and in impact for all receiving Him, the final assault on corrupted mankind: death, and that in such a way, both loving and authoritative, as to surpass all normal human expression (cf. Hosea 13:14, Micah 7:18ff., II Corinthians 5:21,Ephesians 3).
Thus when man wholly sacrifices himself for someone or something, turning from God, he is already worthy of death (Romans 3:23ff.), and either facing it or turning to gain mercy by the work of Another. the Saviour, when God Himself, the Lord, does provides. With Him, there was no preceding need to come, to act, to save, only the love of mankind and the power and understanding of God which for all that, never used violence to obtain souls, or their pretended loyalty. As to this death penalty of sin (Romans 6:23), He took it for man that man might have a way out and on (II Peter 3:18), from the due response to his sin, instead, surrendering himself to the grace and pardon of God. It was practical, precious and pure, self-sacrificing and not self-centred.
Resurrected after precisely three days as so often foretold to His disciples, He fulfilled as all else, this part of the program, moving from spitting and whipping to dribbling death and lung crushing enfeeblement, in order through it, to rupture the ruinous mortality itself, and accept for believers the penalty itself (Isaiah 53:1-6 predicting this).
Thus He gave. Thus He brought on the very testimony of immortality, incorruptibility which He promised (cf. I Cor. 15:42ff.). Here the OBJECT lesson had much in it of an ABJECT lesson in that He endured the mockery which laughs at grandeur and scoffs at sacrifice, mistaking love for failure. It is always a difficulty for murderers to find the victim still alive, and here, having seen the last drops of blood, and heard the final commitment of His Spirit to His Father (Luke 23:46), they could not doubt His death.
Neither the entire resources of the duly warned Roman Empire (very unholy empire), which had been made for about a thousand years in very obvious format (Psalm 16, 22, 40, Isaiah 9, 52-53, 55), nor those of the incandescently concerned temple officials, and their appointed guard over the tomb, could stop His departure from the tomb, like an express train, ON TIME as He had repeatedly specified; and their. The guards' account was as confused as absolute shock and overpowering transformation could make it.
The guards ? HOW COULD they know disciples stole the body if they were, as they claimed, asleep! Had they been awake, WHY did they not stop them. If the entire religious junta had such power as Paul showed in his initial persecutions, and were greatly concerned (cf. John 11:45ff.) at what might happen if they did not murder Jesus Christ, from an incensed Rome, why did they not act adequately at protecting the corpse ? but where opposition to God is concerned, nothing is adequate. As with the body of Christ then, so with Israel now, being prepared for His return, there is no power that can halt Him! He has given His word (Jeremiah 31, 33, Micah 7, Luke 21:24-28), and He acts accordingly (cf. Isaiah 64:5). Neither does He need propping, nor is He paralysed; for He IS the God who acts, and He listens to those who wait upon Him in faith.
HE will work and WHO will stop it (Isaiah 14:27). Doubtless, confused, stricken by the divine power of the resurrection, stunned at the epochal action, the guards were aghast as He left the tomb; and they scrambled for an explanation. As with all efforts to remove God, they were left in confusion but with cash for giving their humorously self-contradictory account of the divine resurrection, on time as to the year and the day.
Indeed, the entire episode of death dealing and murder occurred at the very date specified over half a millenium before by Daniel (9:24-27 cf. SMR pp.886 ff.)
Thus this insuperable Jesus, Son of God and Son of Man, provided both illustration and confirmation (Romans 1:1-4) of His earlier works, leaving enemies in confusion and subject both to the spectacle of the power of God and the confrontation of His disciples (as shown in Acts 3, 4 and 5).
Thus we hear amidst the persecutions, this apostolic challenge, for example:
"Rulers of the people and elders of
Israel: If we this day are judged
Again, when told not to preach in this name, the reply included this (Acts 4:19): "
Whether it be right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge!"
They added: "We cannot but speak the things which we have heard and seen."
That is always the advantage of the empirical, that is, the constraint of truth.
Christ completed the entire testimony of the incarnation: in statute, in status, in state and stature. He was divinely legislated to come, came as the Son of God (Luke 1:35, Psalm 40, Isaiah 9), acted with power in multiplied actions of healing and help for thousands, resulting in many coming for healing from other lands. Moreover, in nothing bowed to false authorities, engaged in selling religious offices or masquerading as if from God (Matthew 23:29ff.). As disease was dispelled by His healing power, so death was disrupted both in others and in Himself, showing His salvation above and beyond the grave, and His diagnosis of the need of man through Him to escape from his sins, and find peace in truth, amid redemption, duly received.
Christ also provided in that saving sequence,
testimony unique and indefeasible
of His authenticity from God
(as indeed did every miracle announced
of undismissible power,
of courage that nothing could daunt, as
of acute sensibility with it (Luke 22:49, 23:43).
He who is Lord of all (Romans 14:9) is shown, and in and for His name, He is seen to stand for abiding truth and indeed is it, and cannot be made to fall in matters of love, dynamic, salvation and mercy above all, but is rightly celebrated in all, with no slightest sign of contest from any in His exuberant living and sacrificial dying gift in providing such provisions.
But He must be received (John 1:1-14), and if man wants to escape His salvation then he will not escape the judgment that the race deserves.
Thank God that He has provided the answer not only to man's problems, but an alternative to his fate and a way for his heart, for all who will not rest until they find Him, but are seeking and finding in Him that spiritual quietness and confidence which He supplies to His people abiding in Him (cf. Isaiah 30:15).
For so acting, the Lord has His profound reasons, and for finding the Lord man has his own profound reasons, supplied by the Lord, being made secure in His eternal counsel, who confuses nothing and finds what calls, covers what repents and believes, and keeps what is committed to Him against that day (of judgment) - as in II Timothy 1:12 and 4:8.
The question must be faced, for it certainly cannot be outfaced. It is this.
WHAT is capable of translation, comprehension and multiple use in terms of consistent, connected concepts, consignments and commands ? It must at least have an input and output in terms of the same. It cannot, were it exotic and alien to such things, be covered and interpreted by their means. That is travel in thought by contradiction, not diction, not evidence, not what is germane and demonstrably relevant, but what is irrelevant. It is like saying that ice-cream is made in the gutter.
Moreover, such a handling of concepts is literally meaningless without the control, collation and correction of the same in successive imprints and copies, in the production unit called mind, together with the alliance or enmity of the spirit which makes decisions.
These it may endorse or divorce from mind's thoughts and their concepts. The spirit of a man can chose to exclude or include what his mind shows, to distort, or to seek to compel or dispel such things. That is the operational condition for concepts and mind and will, where either fantasy or fact may lure and appeal, and source hatred can tower or be left with the mental refuse.
This is the synthesis of powers operative in this domain, just as inscribed laws from various constraints operate in and for the other domain of matter. This is why and how these things work, as we all find. In this domain there can be a veritable flood of creation, or a miserable trickle; there can be a start or a stop, for this reason or that. It flows from will, with the inventive mind and the stirred spirit. This is the observed collation of ingredients in this sphere. Such through the fluidity of mind and the work of will, is the way it goes.
Such also is the verificatory way it has gone with our own institution, bodily constitutive resource in code. The creation routine started, and Stephen Jay Gould has stressed with what a multiplicity of major designs, now diminished, it did so. Then as the loss situation confirms, so many designs appear now lost (he estimates 90%) at this level: it stopped and they discontinued. Provision for adaptation within life limits was made and has occurred, and so has defective translation, generation by generation, led to more deterioration of the human genome, with the aggregation of error in an ultra-sensitive system. Many life forms says Gould, are gone; and in major design features, he declares, most of them!
One of the facilities of matter is not to think and invent, and thus the creation of types being stilled, its limits are found. They are neither mysterious, nor contrary to major scientific laws nor lacking in verification. Growth in the sophistication of symbols and their categorical application in new syntheses is not what is being found. Rather, it is inherent provision for adaptation of a given model that is being found as inherent within types. At this level there are magnificent routines of DNA mini-movements to enable the adjustments. However as Denton points out, it is NOT a matter of gradual change, but categorical allocation of individual types, at the micro-biological level.
When it comes to the constraints of systematic programs, as in DNA, you have a further component, the pre-assembled choice of language for concepts, nature of symbol-referent assignment, and the capacity to give notes or reviews of steps taken, if so desired, or the keeping of these entirely secret. These are programmatic features.
If as in DNA, the workings with the implicit choices visible from their effects are basically clear, and you have generation by generation copying of all the scores of volumes of integrated, assimilated and applied information code, that is man's lot, then mistakes are bound to occur in vast copyings over and over, as with the far simpler function of photocopying, however rigorous in this world the course may be. The Second Law of Thermodynamics and the visibility of decline together show this most clearly.
It is a major work of Professor J.C. Sanford in his Genetic Entropy to show this, by systematic thought (as with Dr Werner Gitt's work, Without Excuse, the field there, the nature of information, his specialty), the application of law and the provision of testing including a programmed computer test called Mendel's Accountant. This makes sensitive allowance for all known elements in the systems involved and displays the outcome. The result is that man has been in a situation of genetic make-up that has been declining from the first, and is now continuing in this course to produce an age limit to his continuance on the earth. It becomes, through the aggregation of non-excludable masses of errors, what is called a 'melt-down.'
That of course is one more biblical verification, since Christ in Matthew 24:22 is found declaring that in due course, with decline in morals, restraint and matching increments in disasters, the time would come when unless He, the Lord, returned, then mankind for its part could no longer be viable on this earth.
The Bible also made it clear that there is an ageing phenomenon as well as a destructive one through the mediation of man, and thus the Second Law noted has indeed a macro- as well as a more micro- application (cf. Isaiah 51:6).
On the topic of concepts, creation, biological information, its storage, its source, its implications, new developments and available logical results, please see the following:
The Shadow of a Mighty Rock, pp. 114-123,
Ch. 6 of Tedious Torturers,
Ch.4 of The Way of Truth and the Way of Error, and
Ch. 3 of Alpha and Omega ....
Jointly these cover a great deal of information and application.
On integrality and a mass of other features and foci necessary in addition to the architectural area noted by Carter, and some often not even considered, but still required, see such sites as
The Divine Sublimity ..., Ch. 2, 2011,
History, Review and Overview... Ch. 5, 2005, with
SMR pp. 332Gff (at A PATTERN FOR MAN).
As many an an entrepreneur finds out, creation is not so easy, and involves a whole host of considerations needing attention in the general overall vision as well as in the provision of a multitude of means, organised, oriented, originated in many cases, independently. The play-down of creation as a topic in many areas has come partly from the prostration to reductionist philosophy, partly from the exaltation of mechanism, partly from the electronic provisions of massive generic backgrounds which may NOW be assumed, and partly from other causes such as the run-down dispirited surrender to the bypass of life (what it is), to living (what you do to get what you want).
Germane to this investigation are two further sites:
What is life for ? and
It is well to look to
know what you are talking about, and here definitions help!
Dr Robert Carter, as seen in the Journal of Creation 25, August 2011 dwells not only on the mass of mini-motors involved in securing the effectiveness of the coded word of command (means to what is in this case, as STATED, ends in formation through information). He also considers correlatives to DNA itself. Much more is involved in the total designed directive dictum for what is to be created, through these means, from generation to generation, as at first instituted. Unless ordered in assembly line finesse they are merely part of the roiling rumble of uncreative components in a system limited by what is in it, and meaninglessly unable to attain it.
Indeed, these all the varied technocratic, code controlled marshalled means have to co-operate in order to function, sometimes products of organisation in place, some being required for the initiation of other things, precisely like an assembly plant, with different systems set up, each in its spot and field in the factory, with watchfulness for wrong code and means to correct it included so that it would not be a melt-down. The whole meaningless without their preliminary composure, as well as a futile flop in comprehension is the artless and fancy fabrication of a desperate and maintained ignorance, passed on each generation, to the captive minds of many of the youth so brutalised.
Below inset is an extract.
Another issue, especially displayed among evolutionists (but creationists, including myself, are not immune), is a lack of understanding of the location of biological information. Most people tend to think DNA (the ‘genome’) is the storage place of information. While it is certainly the location of a tremendous amount of it, this gene-centered view ignores the information originally engineered into the first created organisms. The architecture of the cell, including the cell wall, nucleus, sub-cellular compartments and a myriad of molecular machines, did not originate from DNA, but was created separately and alongside DNA. Neither can exist without the other.
Thus in addition to nothing, as the absolute genesis (this is the alternative atheist NECESSITY when question begging irrationality is dispensed with), and the invention (by what is not there) of something, which is to become originator of laws and causality and logic precisely as the sufficient and only sufficient cause, is in functional fact to be found the artfully adequate Speaker, Thinker, Spiritual Entrepreneur, Creator not only in fact, but in featured and legible program. His writing is clear, conceptually correlative, imperially commanding, brilliantly controlling interactive code performers, immersed in means of cognition of commands, without which it would all be useless. In other words, assume all you need, and proceed. No greater question has ever been so inanely pursued with such aplomb; but as the Bible explains, it is no lack in individual power which is the cause, but the generic condition of man without God, like an engine without steering.
God Himself with all facilities eternally, since from nothing nothing comes, and more than that is here, and by His own dicta adding to what He has first already put there at the outset (Genesis 1:1-3), continued with much more to be done from the realms of creativity, in the abundant joy of creation. From these necessary powers, He has happily given to our race, such mini-facilities and maxi-readers and transformers into action, and with it, for all that, remarkable human powers. Grasping each level, as we do on our own scale, He initiated; initiating, He composed, comprising in creation the plans and purposes, demonstrated with the results massively and in myriad form in precision and accuracy, agilely following. Here you do not need to surmise, for it is all written with all the mental agility, facility, conceptual control, permeating punctiliousness and knowing craft which issues in man.
Functionality, symbolisation and its activation, levels of life, whether in tiny trilobites from the so-called Cambrian, or in vastly composed and intricately wrought man, He provided as we are so used to doing in our own creative and much more subdued, yet impressive enterprises. Indeed, it is ludicrous to suppose that what is not there made what is, before it was there to do it. This is woeful beyond irrationality; it is a multiplied form of incoherence that nothing less than spiritual confusion can create. Such moreover is the biblical analysis of the reason for such systematic and central fallacies (Ephesians 4:17ff., Romans 1:17ff.). What can explain at every level has a standpoint which lacks nothing. The total testimony of God answers each problem that vacuity does and can not, being source both of system, singularity, intelligibility, legal input and control, mathematical brilliance and its direction, each unity in man's trilogy in effectual combination - that is, mind, matter and spirit, and the means of rebuke in the afflictions of this world, which mount with its perversities, towards what is the other side of creation, judgment itself, awaits.
That there is a way out of merely supinely following the crowd to the tip is one more creation of God, responsible as ever, remorseless in truth and gracious in originality and tender mercies where they are received, even indicating how they are to be received, and with what repentance and faith. It is here not like a code for construction, but a call for acceptance of His offer while opportunity persists.
See also Spiritual Food and Drink, Ch. 11 for extensive coverage of related issues, including what is below.
One of the most absorbing features of natural life is this: stereotyping, or patterning, or artistic readouts, aesthetic inputs and multiplicity of conformity to such principles, procedures and production qualities.
The discussion of creation by competent mind and power, and the illusion that you don't really need it, that there is a short cut that produces far better than our best creative scientists, though no one ever sees it done, and this without intelligence at all, has seemingly blinded many to the fact that such things are ludicrous.
Pattern by chaos ? by nothing ? by what requires it ? - in which case, what required that to be!
You see leaves in their countless billions each year, made to order (literally, in their genetically ordered arrival basis), and like paper money, they come with apt and ardent qualifications. These are more than a water-mark, as in money, delicately inscribed with fastidious modes of production to make counterfeit inordinately difficult. It is far more than that - but who of us would even consider believing that such a note compiled itself - in terms of what is clearly needed to prevent abuse - by actions and reactions of an incoherent, uncoded, unconstrained type as to production. Ask the waste people to make it ? But at least they have a supply of intelligence, however differently directed. Matter does not, nor did it invent itself from nothing, since again, it was not there to do it.
Waiting would not help, for what a system has, is what it does. Morons don't write Shakespearian verse and fish don't normally fly because they lack what it takes to do so.
At the imagination that when you make the case far worse, and would have not just a moron trying to solve a complex mathematical equation, but NO intelligence set to do so, we smile. If you ask it to present to us the utmost of intelligence to be found, visibly, anywhere, we consult perhaps two physicians.
This no intelligence, in what is it involved ? It is to deploy itself
in creating millions of intra-systematic components of multiple-interacting
regions or domains, such as energy production or protein folding
(a challenging task, we hear, even for a Cray computer type
of intelligently produced equipment); or
to supply elements of an integrality such as the human body, each of these
to be patterned to fit correlative patterns, while the making part
has correlation of code to command and matériel to enable orders
to be carried out, in the equivalent of overall oversight of organisation,
with mini-machines to empower the performance of the commands,
mini-motors such as cause the folding of proteins
and other tasks which don't just happen to happen,
but are subject of specialised orders and equipment
to empower and enable precisely; and
in the securing and intimate maintenance of forms of life, and their juxtaposition
in strictest timing sequence, such as non-breathing apparatus
taking oxygen from blood suddenly being replaced
as to function by lungs getting air direct,
these two systems having a timing device such that they do not leave
the baby dead at the interchange:
and so on ad infinitum.
This, in the unamiable follies of organic evolutionism in its secular rationale, is the project in view gaily dispensing with the logically indispensable*1 and providing from the magical*2. It fails at the first and continues to fail to the last*3, rationally and then empirically, fumbling, stumbling, rumbling in antithesis, antilogy and antinomy*4, non-verification and absent validity*5.
As to God*6, He neither has interest in, nor leaves evidence of such dabblings in bits,
in what is left on the littoral of time, for that has provided neither flamboyant fossils, nor gradualistic failures and incoherent blind alleys, He being far too intelligent to have such ludicrously enhanced difficulties as a mode. Nor is He so debased by desire, vexed or insatiable, that He would attest inadequacy by making in order to abuse.
His word and works alike sanction no such incoherence of method, or anthropomorphic exports from the frustrations and lusts of man, as if to sully the very name of the One against whom man continually offends.
Instead, both in DNA and in all the testimony of man, and nature, we find command and consequence, both in sequence, with no intermission or demission but simple arrival; and not only this, but in His word, the Bible, there is the same chronological setting as befits such sovereign, wise commands, attested in a sequence of highly defined days of morning and evening, first and second, in an introduction to our universe and history and plight, which as in Genesis flows right on in terms of generations of people, even using the same type of phrasing for the initial creation and that flowing from different early patriarchs!*7
The generations of the heaven and the earth are followed by those of Adam and his successors in the same language (e.g. Genesis 2:4 and 5:1). It ALL had to be generated, whether material substructure, living occupants or in God's image, mankind; and within that come the different families, each in its day as the series of lists continues in Genesis. To try to change definitions of terms in mid-stream is to insert confusion and error, wilfully. To assume variable incompetence in the use of finely traced terms is to use presumption of poor writing as a site for swindle, ruthlessly re-writing in weak form, what is exceedingly impressive in very order, form and format.
To the pure, all things are pure, and those who seek a fool for their father (Jeremiah 2:27-28, 16:19ff., Deuteronomy 32:21ff.) can have one, and doubtless, except they repent, will in the end, at the spiritual level; for the devil loves to bluster against all purity and truth. However when the text attests generations in the context of history past and to come, and uses the apt terminology to make a seamless robe from creation to procreation, from the dawning of morning to the spawning of creations in their kind, then the concept that the opposite was meant becomes as foolish as any other fatuous fiction or rambling dream which man seeks to attach whether to civil law or literary interpretation. When his interests are not in view, man will often come back to reason; but where treason is the zwech, then truth is the wreck.
Man alas for his woes, but then as a product of his illustriously free character as given by God, can well be self-deceived and it is an interesting question, just how many devils, such as Judas is defined to be (John 6:70) conceive themselves as angels of light, as well as take on that strictly temporary appearance (as in II Corinthians 11! By Paul those appearing to be so are deemed apostles of deceit "sham apostles, deceptive workers" - (Berkeley). Dip once into the barrel of artistic belligerence, rambling unruliness and you can inherit self-deception - like a pandemic, it can infect a nation! and transform a culture to chaotic mismatch of fact and fiction. While those so afflicted may be pitied, may be helped, yet often they succumb, sometimes with relish. But let us return to the text.
It is generations of which Genesis 1-6 speaks, whether of heaven and earth of or Noah, and it is commands which it stipulates; and these later generations, into time they come also by DNA orders, derivative commands, as words indeed institute creation and maintain it. Everything is established at the first and operates according to kind as instituted. Days are the instrumental chronology, commands are the executive medium, results IN KIND (not diversities of scattered witlessness or inchoate oddities, neither found on earth nor described in Genesis) are the purposive and empirically announced result.
Man's desire to detach the dynamic from the purpose and the purpose from the power inscribed in the result, indeed written into the DNA in the case of life: this is as irrational and anti-revelational, as anti-empirical as it is source in turn of antinomy*4.
Let us look a little further at the situation in its kind.
Thus what does not have INHERENT intelligence (it never shows it),
call it nothing, call it matter, call it nature, as you will, depending on how much of the question you desire to beg (science is not interested in begging questions, but attesting answers from evidence),
expresses what it has.
In this case, in terms of the naturalistic need, there is the absence of observable wit inventing wisdom or its works. Study it and see and find and attest. Not even the information is ever found so to come!*8. Logically illiterate guesswork*4 and empirically vacant attestation*5 is the basis of nebulosity, vomit from the void the ground of machinations about the nature of reason.
Those who want it can have it; but it will not change reality and the results of dreaming. It is the awakening which then can be devastating as in any other intoxication of spirit, the very nature of which tends to dull the senses until the affliction lifts (cf. Proverbs 23:29ff. - provided below). Then, for a person or civilisation, it may be too late. In its day with the Messiah showing and achieving grounds of free salvation on earth, such tardiness was the fateful lot of Israel, which is an illustration, though here also predicted for a remnant are far better things (Micah 7, Deuteronomy 32-33, Hosea, Romans 11,Zechariah 12).
See interrogatory approach in Lectures on Creation, .Ch. 4 in The Kingdom of Heaven.
Genetic Entropy op.cit. pp. 153-4,
Refuting Evolution, Dr Jonathan Sarfati p. 129,
By Design by the same author, Ch. 9, together with and
Reductionism resembles a student who finding a problem too hard, says, It is really only a case of so and so, citing an easier or simpler case, and setting an easier challenge. It means that all that is in fact involved in your subject, you pare, you cut, you diminish, cynically or with blasé seeming indifference, you ignore. Hence your solution is mere mischief, cheating, superficial chomping on the bit, and using only a bit of the topic, often with flamboyance and a forcible sounding blindness. It dismisses aspects, often without acknowledgement, and transgresses logically into simplistic parallels.
The topic is left unresolved, unexplained, a self-cultivated blind spot.
For a fuller treatment see the trilogy, The Shadow of a Mighty Rock, and the diversified volume, That Magnificent Rock on this site.
The wrath of God in the flood as in the Sodom and Gomorrah devastation is neither sudden nor strange. The ruin of design, haughty dismissal of inbuilt and genetically coded provision for continuance of the race as a sacred aspect of life, the evil desires and multitudinous departures from source have before led nearly to man's extinction, and are currently threatening it very obviously again, with the opportunities to sprinkle radioactive particles or bombs in profusion amid wild ferocities of spirit.
This intense terrestrial peril was predicted by Christ as in Matthew 24:22 (cf. Acts 2:19 cf. Joel 2:13). Man, living increasingly notoriously apart from God, often contemptuously superior in attitude, but scarcely a babe in knowledge comparable to that shown in the creation as babes come and grow in every new generation, is indeed to find that it is the words of Christ that will ENDURE when the heaven and earth do not! As to His words, it is their invariable custom! This, He made clear, would be the case (Matthew 24:35) here: His words would NOT pass away, whereas the earth and heavens - apparently so huge and impressive, but still a creation from the mind and power of God) WOULD pass away.
No qualification was given, and the case was clear and obtrusively manifest: on the contrary, indeed, there is here a most impelling contrast! A universe, though it be great, is yet a bagatelle compared with the word of God who creates a universe at will, and send it away at will, for His own reasons. Biblically the torrential rain of iniquity flooding the earth is an underlying reason, the spiritual swamps breeding spiritual mosquitos relentless in seeking their supper from the wounds man imposes on himself.
It is like an author. You could perhaps make a bonfire of his many books, without touching Him. It would be a far lesser thing. The Creator may create many marvels, such as our time and space, and the various continua such as thought and ideas and matter, and their varied forms, concepts and constraints.
Removing one, as is to be the future of this present universe, is no great marvel, except for its rich wonders in its composition. It will certainly be impressive (II Peter 3, Isaiah 51:6). As with any site of folly, removal can be wrought with a passion of revulsion. Unfortunately some would seem to become mesmerised with matter, and imagine its ways jutting back almost into God, when it is merely a creation; or almost lingering, some may find it hard to say goodbye to this world.
In one such case, an astronomer even in ways too reminiscent of the old liberal licence, wrote to move out what is the word of God and not have this biblically emphasised disruption/dispersion. He appeared to will the deletion of the deletion, enabling it to continue, altering Gospel and other text. Neither three Gospels nor the many biblical impassioned or emphatic statements in the Bible that the departure of heaven and earth will be from the very presence of God, that no more place will be found for them, that this creation will pass away, be gone and thrown off like an old coat, that it will be dismissed from the presence of One who does not change, suffice to restrain. Another 'word' seems to arrive. Why this anti-biblical creative surge to arrest judgment in this field, as if judging the means with the ends is not a mode of intensive repudiation!
The word of God says one thing; someone else says another. It is not uncommon, but here strange. However where the word of God does not suffice for some reason, perhaps the above, perhaps some other stimulus is at work. Every jot and tittle is to be fulfilled, and the demolition of heaven and earth is rather more than this...
Yet the words of God do not alter, while ongoing history continues as predicted precisely (cf. SMR Chs. 8-9). It will do so here, when the time of dissolution comes.
Indeed, when the word of God is dismissed, whatever the intention, it does not move. It is the universe that will be moved, just as it came, just as the word of God declares.
The scope of such an error is of interest at this phase of history; but when Christ was buried, He erupted back, and even if His word be buried, it nevertheless continues quietly as the unruffled surface of a lake in calm weather. The main feature in view is this: there is none who can outwit or outspeak or fashion thoughts not demonstrable from the word of God, and give them any sort of final authority, let alone have them sustained in collision with His word. God always has the last word, just as He had for man, the first thought, and is judge of all. Let us emphasise it a little: If a jot or tittle cannot fail in meaning and fulfilment (Matthew 5:17-20), neither can a universe stay contrary to His word. What became a useful in-law for man will at the end of its course, become an outlaw, from the very presence of God.
The aspects in view may be found at Bulletins 53 and 93.
*3 See on these premises and promises, the following.
Genesis 12:1-3, 15:18-21, 17:7-8-21,
21:12, 35:11f., 28:14 with Romans 9:11.
See Dancers ... Ch. 3,*4. See also Divine Agenda, Ch. 6 and More Marvels ...Ch. 4.
It continuation through the fall and flood, yes and to the end of the Age was partly therapy, partly institution of free redemption at cost to Himself, partly putting all things to the test (cf. I Thessalonians 5, I Peter 1:6-7, Hebrews 11, Job 1), partly systematic exposure and attestation of evil's nature and fraud, partly the testimony of His people to the world, whether in the Jewish phase (Romans 11) or the Gentile, or the combination in one Messianic faith in the Saviour: and had many more issues to exhibit and secure, then the world was sustained, sometimes by a small enough margin, till all was made manifest (I Corinthians 14:25), pretence is repatriated to hell and love is given its living quarters under fire .
God is a God of authority, but not
mere authority; and in truth, He has His own ways.
On these religions, see:
1011- 1026, (Buddhism chiefly);
996-1008 - more emphasis on Hinduism and such categories; SBCMM 1,
See: Secession from Secession from Supposition Ch. 9 for the use of these terms in this setting.
See for example Bulletin 95, 61 , 52, 44, 32.